(PS) Graham v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK E. GRAHAM, Case No. 2:19-cv-02429-TLN-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 13 v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS 14 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., ECF Nos. 4 & 32 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On January 3, 2022, the court issued an order that continued the initial scheduling 19 conference to April 28, 2022, and directed the parties to file status reports by no later than April 20 21, 2022. ECF No. 32; see ECF No. 4. Defendants timely submitted a status report. Plaintiff, 21 however, failed to file his own status report. 22 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires 23 litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute 24 or failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Hells Canyon Pres. 25 Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 26 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to 27 administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. 28 Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 1 The court will give plaintiff the opportunity to explain why this case should not be 2 || dismissed for failure to file a status report. Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this order will 3 || constitute another failure to comply with a court order and will result in a recommendation that 4 | this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff must show cause why this case should not be 5 || dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. Should plaintiff wish 6 || to continue with this lawsuit, he shall also file a status report. 7 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 8 1. The initial scheduling conference currently set for April 28, 2022, is continued to June 9 | 9, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 9. 10 2. By no later than May 19, 2022, plaintiff shall file a status report in accordance with the 11 court’s December 5, 2019 order. See ECF No. 4. 12 3. Plaintiff shall show cause, by no later than May 19, 2022, why sanctions should not be 13 || imposed for failure to comply with the court’s January 3, 2022 order. 14 4. Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a 15 || recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply 16 | with court orders. 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 ( 1 Sty — Dated: _ April 26, 2022 q_-—_— 20 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28