Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-00702/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-00702-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 1

Service on both defendants was accomplished by serving the Secretary of State,

pursuant to the Court’s order of August 13, 2002.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CITY OF OAKLAND,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MARDECO, INC., et al.,

Defendants 

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS

/

No. C-02-0702 MMC

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

SHOW CAUSE WHY CLAIMS AGAINST

DEFENDANTS T.P. HOGAN AND

TILDEN LUMBER CO. SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO

PROSECUTE

A review of the docket in the above-titled action indicates that plaintiff, on August 29,

2002, served defendants T. P. Hogan (“Hogan”) and Tilden Lumber Company (“Tilden”)

with the summons and First Amended Complaint.1 After such service was accomplished,

plaintiff, on January 2, 2003, filed its Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). The docket,

however, does not indicate that plaintiff has ever served the SAC on Hogan or Tilden.

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS plaintiff to show cause, in writing and no

later than July 15, 2005, why its claims against Hogan and Tilden should not be dismissed

for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:02-cv-00702-MMC Document 77 Filed 06/24/05 Page 1 of 1