Avalos v. Franco De Pizano ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE AVALOS, Case No. 1:20-cv-01571-DAD-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT 13 v. ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS 14 MARTHA FRANCO DE PIZANO, et al., FIVE DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 17 George Avalos (“Plaintiff”) filed this action pursuan to the Americans with Disabilities 18 Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq. on November 6, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) On January 24, 2021, a 19 notice of settlement was filed and the parties were ordered to file dispositive documents within 20 thirty days of January 28, 2021. (ECF Nos. 16, 17.) More than thirty days have passed and the 21 parties have not filed dispositive documents. 22 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules 23 or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 24 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 25 control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 26 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 27 2000). 28 / / / 1 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS the parties TO SHOW CAUSE in writing 2 | within five (5) days of the date of entry of this order why dispositive documents have not yet 3 | been filed. The parties are forewarned that the failure to show cause may result in the 4 | imposition of sanctions. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Se 7 | Dated: _March 2, 2021 _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28