Rudolph Forrest v. Bank of America

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUDOLPH FORREST, ) Case No. CV 25-0461 FMO (SSCx) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) 13 v. ) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE 14 BANK OF AMERICA, et al., ) ) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16 17 Plaintiff filed his complaint on January 17, 2025 (Dkt. 1). By order dated April 7, 2025, 18 plaintiff was ordered to show cause, on or before April 14, 2025, why this action should not be 19 dismissed for plaintiff's failure to complete service of the summons and complaint as required by 20 Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See Dkt. 16, Court’s Order of April 7, 2025). 21 Plaintiff was admonished that “[f]ailure to file a timely response to th[e] Order to Show Cause shall 22 result in the action . . . being dismissed for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the 23 orders of the court.” (Id.) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 & 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 24 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962)). As of the date of this Order,…