(PC) Clark v. Saipher ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER C. CLARK, Case No. 2:21-cv-01326-DAD-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 13 v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 14 MARSHALL SAIPHER, et al., RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE 15 Defendants. DAYS 16 17 On October 4, 2022, the court screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint and notified 18 plaintiff that it alleged cognizable Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference and California Torts 19 Claims Act (“CTCA”) claims against defendants Saipher and Naseer, but that the other claims 20 were not viable. ECF No. 20. The court gave plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint 21 or to advise the court if he wished to stand by his current complaint and proceed only with his 22 Eighth Amendment and CTCA claims against defendants Saipher and Naseer. Id. at 4. To date, 23 plaintiff has not filed either an amended complaint or a notice of election to proceed on the 24 cognizable claims. 25 To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines. 26 The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders 27 or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. 28 Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1 | 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer 2 || justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 3 | F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 4 Plaintiff will be given a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for 5 | his failure to file an amended complaint or notice of election to proceed on the cognizable claims. 6 | Plaintiffs failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and 7 | will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to 8 | show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute 9 | and failure to state aclaim. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he shall file, 10 | within twenty-one days, an amended complaint or advise if he wishes to proceed only with his 11 | Eighth Amendment and CTCA claims against defendants Saipher and Naseer. 12 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 ( ie — Dated: _ December 8, 2022 Q_—_—. 15 JEREMY D. PETERSON 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28