Johnson v. Gold Touch Investment SPE, LLC ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 SCOTT JOHNSON, Case No. 18-cv-05881-VKD 9 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 10 v. ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED 11 GOLD TOUCH INVESTMENT SPE, LLC, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 14 Plaintiff Scott Johnson filed the present action on September 25, 2018. Dkt. No. 1. 15 Pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2019 order granting the parties’ stipulated request for an 16 extension of time, the parties’ deadline to complete mediation was extended to January 29, 2020. 17 Dkt. No. 37. According to the docket entry dated January 28, 2020, the mediation scheduled for 18 January 29 was taken off calendar. Dkt. No. 39. Mr. Johnson’s last day to file an administrative 19 motion requesting a case management conference was February 5, 2020. Dkt. No. 37. Mr. 20 Johnson did not file a motion for a case management conference on February 5, 2020, nor did he 21 seek relief from that deadline. 22 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the 23 orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629–33 24 (1962). Mr. Johnson is directed to file a written response to this order by February 11, 2020 and 25 to appear before the Court on February 18, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2, Fifth Floor, 280 26 South First Street, San Jose, California 95113 and show cause why this action should not be 27 dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: February 6, 2020 3 . 28 □ 4 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI 5 United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 © 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28