Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_19-cv-04081/USCOURTS-cand-5_19-cv-04081-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

SHELBY GAIL HEIFETZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALERIE J. MACKEN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-04081-VKD 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

ACTION SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED

Plaintiff Shelby Heifetz filed the present action on July 16, 2019. Dkt. No. 1. Pursuant to 

General Order 56, plaintiff’s last day to complete service on all defendants or to file a motion for 

administrative relief from the service deadline was September 16, 2019. Dkt. No. 4. On October 

1, 2019, Ms. Heifetz returned the executed summons indicating that she had served defendant Jose 

Hernandez on August 15, 2019.1 Dkt. No. 9. However, the docket does not indicate that Ms. 

Heifetz ever completed service on defendants Valerie Macken or Galdino Hernandez, or that those 

two defendants have waived service of summons. 

Additionally, pursuant to General Order 56, the parties’ last day to conduct a joint site 

inspection was October 29, 2019 and Ms. Heifetz’s last day to file a notice of need for mediation 

was December 10, 2019. Dkt. No. 4. Ms. Heifetz did not file a notice of need for mediation, nor 

did she seek relief from the December 10 deadline. 

The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the 

 

1 Mr. Hernandez’s deadline to respond to complaint was due on September 5, 2019, but he did not 

file his answer until October 4, 2019. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i); Dkt. No. 10. Despite 

multiple successive clerk’s notices to do so, Mr. Hernandez has not filed a consent or declination 

to proceed before a magistrate judge. Dkt. Nos. 11, 12.

Case 5:19-cv-04081-VKD Document 13 Filed 12/11/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629–33 

(1962). The parties are directed to file a written response, jointly or separately, to this order by 

December 18, 2019 and to appear before the Court on December 20, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. in 

Courtroom 2, Fifth Floor, 280 South First Street, San Jose, California 95113 and show cause why 

this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 11, 2019

VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:19-cv-04081-VKD Document 13 Filed 12/11/19 Page 2 of 2