Nicholas C Pappas v. Rojas
Filing
14
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym: Second Order to Show Cause Why Complaint Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute. Accordingly, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order, that is, byOctober 30, 2013, plaintiff is again ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing (SEE MINUTES FOR DETAILS). (kca)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
CV 13-2794-JFW (SP)
Title
NICHOLAS C. PAPPAS v. SERGEANT ROJAS
Present: The
Honorable
Date
October 9, 2013
Sheri Pym, United States Magistrate Judge
Kimberly I. Carter
None
None
Deputy Clerk
Court Reporter / Recorder
Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:
Attorneys Present for Defendant:
None Present
None Present
Proceedings:
(In Chambers) Second Order to Show Cause Why Complaint Should Not
Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute
On June 24, 2013, this court, having completed screening of the complaint,
dismissed it with leave to file a First Amended Complaint by July 24, 2013. The court
issued the Order Dismissing Complaint with Leave to Amend, and mailed that Order to
plaintiff at what was then his address of record, his place of incarceration at the Men's
Central Jail in Los Angeles, California.
Plaintiff did not file a First Amended Complaint by the July 24, 2013 deadline.
Instead, the mailing to plaintiff with the Order Dismissing Complaint with Leave to
Amend was returned to the court as undeliverable on July 29, 2013, with an indication
that plaintiff has been released from custody. Accordingly, on August 5, 2013, the court
issued an Order to Show Cause by August 19, 2013 why the case should not be dismissed
for failure to prosecute and/or comply with a court order.
On August 7, 2013, plaintiff filed a notice with the court of his new address,
stating that he has been moved to another institution. Plaintiff’s address of record has
now been changed. In light of the notice of change of address, the court discharged the
August 5, 2013 Order to Show Cause.
In addition, because it was not clear when plaintiff was moved to a new institution,
the court directed the Court Clerk to send plaintiff (1) another copy of the Order
Dismissing Complaint with Leave to Amend that was filed in this case on June 24, 2013,
and (2) a blank Central District civil rights complaint form to use for filing a First
Amended Complaint. In addition, the court sua sponte extended the deadline for plaintiff
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
CV 13-2794-JFW (SP)
Date
Title
October 9, 2013
NICHOLAS C. PAPPAS v. SERGEANT ROJAS
to file a First Amended Complaint to September 13, 2013. Finally, the court again
cautioned plaintiff that failure to timely comply with the Order Dismissing Complaint
with Leave to Amend, including the new September 13, 2013 deadline to file a First
Amended Complaint, may result in a recommendation that this action, or portions
thereof, be dismissed.
Over three weeks have passed beyond the extended, September 13, 2013 deadline,
yet the court has not received a First Amended Complaint or any other communication
from plaintiff since the notice of change of address.
Accordingly, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order, that is, by
October 30, 2013, plaintiff is again ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why
this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with a court
order. Plaintiff is cautioned that his failure to timely file a response to this Order to Show
Cause may be deemed by the court as consent to the dismissal of this action without
prejudice. In the event plaintiff wishes to voluntarily dismiss this action, plaintiff may
complete and return the enclosed Notice of Dismissal form by October 30, 2013.
If plaintiff files a First Amended Complaint by October 30, 2013, this Order to
Show Cause will be automatically discharged, and plaintiff need not respond to it
separately.
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?