Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00505/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00505-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Arambula
Defendant
J & J Sports Productions, Inc.
Plaintiff
Mariscos El Tapatio
Defendant

Document Text:

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., 

Plaintiff,

v.

JESUS ARAMBULA d/b/a Mariscos El 

Tapatio,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-00505---SKO

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE 

RECOMMENDED FOR DISMISSAL

Plaintiff J & J Sports Productions, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint on April 1, 2015, 

against Defendant Jesus Arambula d/b/a Mariscos El Tapatio ("Defendant"). An executed 

summons was filed by Plaintiff on July 28, 2015, reflecting service by substituted service at 

Plaintiff’s place of business. (Doc. 8 (served on “Veronica Figueroa”).) Plaintiff requested the 

Clerk of Court to enter default against Defendant and the Clerk entered default against Defendant 

on September 11, 2015. (Docs. 12; 13.) On September 30, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for 

default judgment against Defendant, which is currently pending before the undersigned. 

(Doc. 15.) 

The Court has reviewed the docket to determine whether service had been properly 

effectuated upon Defendant. It was unable to determine whether the proof of service reflecting 

Case 1:15-cv-00505-DAD-SKO Document 18 Filed 10/13/15 Page 1 of 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

2

service attempts at Defendant’s residence and substituted service at a location different from the 

business location identified in the Complaint was proper. The Court therefore ordered Plaintiff to 

file a declaration, by no later than October 9, 2015, reflecting that service was properly effectuated 

upon Defendant by substituted service at this alternate address. (Doc. 17.) Plaintiff has failed to 

comply with this order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. By no later than October 23, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a statement showing cause 

why this action should not be recommended for dismissal; and

2. If Plaintiff fails to file a statement by October 23, 2015, the Court will recommend 

that this action be dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 13, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00505-DAD-SKO Document 18 Filed 10/13/15 Page 2 of 2