Dhillon

Akal Broadcasting Corp v. Dhillon

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 18, 20241:24-cv-00029California618 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AKAL BROADCASTING CORP., et al. Case No. 1:24-cv-00029-JLT-SAB 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 12 STATUS REPORT AND CONTINUING THE v. MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 13 TO MAY 21, 2024 SUKHDEV SINGH DHILLON, et al., 14 Defendants. DEADLINE: April 23, 2024 15 16

17 Plaintiffs initiated this action on January 5, 2024 against Defendants Sukhdev Singh 18 Dhillon, Mohan S. Cheema, Tarnvir S. Bisla, Jagdeep S. Dhaliwal, Baaz Broadcasting Corp., 19 Radio Punjab, Inc., Amar Broadcasting Inc., TEG Broadcasting Inc., and Radio Spice USA Inc. 20 (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiffs have not filed any proof of service on any Defendants and no Defendant 21 has filed a responsive pleading. The mandatory scheduling conference is set for April 23, 2024, 22 and a joint scheduling report was due April 16, 2024. (ECF No. 4.) No joint report has been filed. 23 Rule 4(m) provides that “[i]f a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is 24 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.