(PC) Wheaton v. McComber ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GENE PAUL WHEATON, Case No. 2:22-cv-01434-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 J. McCROMBER, et al., RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE 15 Defendants. DAYS 16 17 On November 14, 2022, I screened plaintiff’s complaint, notified them that it failed to 18 state a claim, and gave them thirty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 14. To date, 19 plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. 20 To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines. 21 The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders 22 or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. 23 Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 24 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer 25 justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 26 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 27 Plaintiff will be given a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for 28 their failure to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this order will 1 | constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in a recommendation that this 2 | action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to show cause within twenty-one days why 3 | this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. Should 4 | plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, they shall file, within twenty-one days, an amended 5 | complaint. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ December 22, 2022 Q_—_—. 9 JEREMY D. PETERSON 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28