Cynthia Clancy Ahearn v. City of Palos Verdes Estates et al

Filing 140

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Robert N. Block. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 2/13/2009. (see document for further details) (klg)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 CYNTHIA CLANCY AHEARN, ) Case No. CV 07-2029-AHS (RNB) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE vs. ) ) CITY OF PALOS VERDES, et ) al., ) ) Defendants. ) In the Court's November 4, 2008 Order Discharging Order to Show Cause and

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 Denying Plaintiff Leave to File Second Amended Complaint, the Court ordered 19 plaintiff to file a Third Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days if she still wished 20 to proceed on her equal protection, retaliation, and/or conspiracy claims. 21 Subsequently, the Court issued a Minute Order granting in part plaintiff's ex 22 parte request that the Court either stay the proceedings or in the alternative extend any 23 deadlines to January 5, 2009. In accordance with plaintiff's alternative request, the 24 Court set January 5, 2009 as the new filing deadline for plaintiff's objections to the 25 Court's Report and Recommendation with respect to the Bennett defendants' Motion 26 to Dismiss. 27 When the remaining defendants then brought to the Court's attention that the 28 Court had neglected to set a new filing deadline for plaintiff's Third Amended 1

1 Complaint, the Court issued another Minute Order extending to January 16, 2009 the 2 deadline for plaintiff to serve and file a Third Amended Complaint rectifying the 3 deficiencies of plaintiff's equal protection, retaliation, and/or conspiracy claims that 4 were discussed in the November 4, 2008 Order. 5 7 The January 16, 2009 deadline has passed without any Third Amended Accordingly, on or before February 13, 2009, plaintiff is ORDERED to show 6 Complaint being filed by plaintiff. 8 good cause, if any she has, why she failed to timely file a Third Amended Complaint 9 in compliance with the Court's previous orders and why this action should not be 10 dismissed for failure to comply with a Court order and/or failure to prosecute. 11 Plaintiff shall attempt to show such good cause by filing a declaration under penalty 12 of perjury, accompanied by a Third Amended Complaint rectifying the deficiencies 13 of plaintiff's equal protection, retaliation, and/or conspiracy claims that were 14 discussed in the Court's November 4, 2008 Order. 15 The Court admonishes plaintiff that her failure to timely file a declaration 16 responsive to this Order to Show Cause accompanied by her Third Amended 17 Complaint will be deemed by the Court as another violation of a Court order and as 18 further evidence of her lack of prosecution, and will result in a recommendation to the 19 District Judge that this action be dismissed on those grounds. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S. Ct. 1386, 1388, 8 L. Ed. 21 2d 734, reh'g denied, 371 U.S. 873, 83 S. Ct. 115, 9 L. Ed. 2d 112 (1962); Carey v. 22 King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988). 23 24 DATED: January 23, 2009 25 26 27 28 2 ROBERT N. BLOCK UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE