Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Anderson Law Firm 5 x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Marine | New York Eastern
Extension of Time to Complete Discovery
MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Joint Status Letter by Gregory Sichenzia. (Grillo, Joanna)
Labor: Labor/Mgt. Relations | Massachusetts
Order To Show Cause
District Judge Julia E. Kobick: ELECTRONIC ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE entered. Plaintiff Jackson Dos Santos served defendant Rogeria Seikel on October 3, 2025. ECF 5 . The Court granted Seikel an extension of time until November 24, 2025 to respond to the complaint and then stayed the case for sixty days on November 24, 2025 to permit mediation. ECF 10, 12. Those sixty days came and went without Seikel answering the complaint. Yet Dos Santos has not filed anything to progress his case against Seikel. Nor did Dos Santos or Seikel respond to the Court’s August 10, 2026 order requiring a joint status report within two weeks. ECF 24. Having failed to file that report by August 24, 2026 or progress his case against Seikel, Dos Santos must also show cause by September 9, 2026 why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Dietz v. Bouldin, 579 U.S. 40, 47 (2016) (district courts have “inherent power to dismiss case[s] sua sponte for failure to prosecute” (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 631-32 (1962))); Tower Ventures, Inc. v. City of Westfield, 296 F.3d 43, 46 (1st Cir. 2002) (“disobedience of court orders . . . warrants dismissal”). Failure to do timely respond to this show cause order will result in immediate dismissal of this action. (Currie, Haley)
Plaintiff Jackson Dos Santos served defendant Rogeria Seikel on October 3, 2025. ECF 5 . The Court granted Seikel an extension of time until November 24, 2025 to respond to the complaint and then stayed the case for sixty days on November 24, 2025 to permit mediation. ECF 10, 12. Those sixty days came and went without Seikel answering the complaint. Yet Dos Santos has not filed anything to progress his case against Seikel. Nor did Dos Santos or Seikel respond to the Court’s August 10, 2026 order requiring a joint status report within two weeks. ECF 24. Having failed to file that report by August 24, 2026 or progress his case against Seikel, Dos Santos must also show cause by September 9, 2026 why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Dietz v. Bouldin, 579 U.S. 40, 47 (2016) (district courts have “inherent power to dismiss case[s] sua sponte for failure to prosecute” (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 631-32 (1962))); Tower Ventures, Inc. v. City of Westfield, 296 F.3d 43, 46 (1st Cir. 2002) (“disobedience of court orders . . . warrants dismissal”). Failure to do timely respond to this show cause order will result in immediate dismissal of this action. (Currie, Haley)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.