California Case Summaries

Alicia Fasheh v. Skims Body, Inc — Court orders plaintiff to show cause why case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution

Unreported / Non-Citable

Case
Alicia Fasheh v. Skims Body, Inc
Court
U.S. District Court — Central District of California
Judge
Serena R. Murillo
Date decided
2026-11-03
Docket No.
8:26-cv-02378
Topics
order to show cause, dismissal for lack of prosecution, Rule 41(b), failure to prosecute, entry of default, stipulation extending time, voluntary dismissal, sua sponte dismissal

Disposition notice

On November 3, 2026, Judge Serena R. Murillo of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued an order to show cause in Alicia Fasheh v. Skims Body, Inc., No. 8:26-cv-02378-SRM (PVCx). Although the plaintiff had filed a proof of service, the deadline for the defendant to respond to the complaint had passed and the plaintiff had taken no further action. The court, acting on its own motion, ordered the plaintiff to show cause in writing by November 10, 2026, why the action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response, the court stated it would accept the filing of a request for entry of default, a stipulation extending the defendant's time to respond that complies with Local Rule 8.3, or a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41. The court warned that failure to file a timely and appropriate response may result in dismissal without further notice or order, citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), Local Rule 41-6, and Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court authority recognizing courts' power to dismiss sua sponte for failure to prosecute. No oral argument will be heard unless ordered.

Read the public order

Scroll to Top