(PS) Rhuma v. State of Libya

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TAHER RHUMA, et al., No. 2:20-cv-02366 DAD AC PS 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 STATE OF LIBYA, 15 Defendant. 16 17 This case has not advanced since its commencement two years ago, due to defective 18 service of process and/or failure of defendant to appear in conformity with the law. See ECF 19 Nos. 17 (order to show case directed to plaintiffs, regarding adequacy of service), 18 (order to 20 show cause directed to defendant, regarding legitimacy of answer), 20 (order striking purported 21 answer), 21 (order extending time for service). On July 25, 2022, plaintiffs filed documentation 22 indicating that defendant had been served with unspecified court documents via DHL on June 19, 23 2022. ECF No. 27 at 2.1 Defendant has not answered or appeared, even though over 135 days 24 have passed since the date of purported service. 25 Plaintiffs have taken no action to advance the case since providing service documents to 26 the Clerk’s Office. On November 2,…