UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-08068-SPG Date November 14, 2025 Title Bruce Dwain Copeland v. Daniel Torrez et al.

ee Present: The Honorable SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

P. Gomez Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present

Proceeding: (INCHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE LACK OF

PROSECUTION

On August 25, 2025, Plaintiff Bruce Copeland (“Plaintiff’) filed this case against Defendants Daniel Torrez and the United States District Court, Central District of California (together, “Defendants”). (ECF No. 1). The Court takes notice that Plaintiff has not filed anything in the case since, including a proof of service. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 4-6 (“The plaintiff must file a proof of service within 14 days of service of the summons and complaint or receipt of a notice and acknowledgement of service. Failure to file a proof of service timely may result in the imposition of sanctions against the plaintiff, including but not limited to the dismissal of the defendant that was the subject of the proof of service.”). The Court enjoys the inherent power to dismiss for lack of prosecution on its own motion. See, e.g., Link v. Wabash R. Co., 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.”). Consistent with that authority, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to show cause, in writing, on or before November 21, 2025, why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. This matter will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiffs’ response. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78. Failure to respond will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer pg