CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:24-cv-01933-FWS-ADS Date: November 13, 2024 Title: Renjie Yu v. Mercedes Benz USA, LLC et al.

Present: HONORABLE FRED W. SLAUGHTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Melissa H. Kunig N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

On October 4, 2024, the court issued an order vacating its previous entry of judgment in this matter per Defendant Mercedes Benz USA, LLC’s (“Defendant”) request. (Dkt. 14.) The court also ordered Plaintiff Renjie Yu (“Plaintiff”) to either file a notice of dismissal, dismissing this action with prejudice in accordance with the accepted Rule 68 Offer, or seek other appropriate relief no later than November 8, 2024. (Id. at 4). As of 8:30 a.m. on November 13, 2024, Plaintiff has not filed a notice of dismissal or any other responsive filing. (See generally Dkt.) Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by November 18, 2024, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and prosecute this action. Plaintiff may discharge this Order to Show Cause by filing a notice of dismissal consistent with the court’s October 4, 2024, Order, or a status report regarding the current status of the parties’ settlement agreement. Failure to comply with the court’s order will result in dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 629 (1962) (“The authority of a federal trial court to dismiss a plaintiff’s action with prejudice because of his failure to prosecute cannot seriously be doubted.”); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 693, 699 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[C]ourts may dismiss under Rule 41(b) sua sponte, at least under certain circumstances.”); Ash v. Cvetkov, 739 F.2d 493, 496 (9th Cir. 1984) (“It is within the inherent power of the court to sua sponte dismiss a case for lack of prosecution.”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.