Oliver B Mitchell v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs et al

Filing 81

FINAL ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. Since Plaintiff has failed to timely file a Third Amended Complaint, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff shall, by no later than April 17, 2017, show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. (See Minute Order for complete details) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Dismissal (Blank)) (afe)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 13-06030-ODW (AS)

Title

Oliver B. Mitchell v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, et. al.,

Present: The Honorable

Date

March 17, 2017

Alka Sagar, United States Magistrate Judge

Alma Felix

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

Attorneys Present for Defendant:

N/A

N/A

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) FINAL ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On December 28, 2016, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) why this action should
not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. (Docket No. 69).
Petitioner was directed to file a Third Amended Complaint no later than January 18, 2017 that “cures the
deficiencies in the last pleading, or upon the filing of a declaration under penalty of perjury stating why
Plaintiff is unable to file a Third Amended Complaint.” Id. This Order was issued after the Court - on
December 20, 2016 - issued a notice of document discrepancy and order rejecting “Response to Order to
Show Cause,” received on December 6, 2016, for failure to comply with Local Rule 11-6 (no response shall
exceed 25 pages in length absent leave of Court for good cause shown). (Docket No. 68).
On January 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a request for leave to exceed page limit which was denied by the
Court on January 5, 2017. (Docket No. 73). Plaintiff was warned that the Court’s December 28, 2016 Order
directing Plaintiff to file a Third Amended Complain no later than January 18, 2017 remained in affect. Id.
On January 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed a 17-page declaration under penalty of perjury, challenging, inter
alia, the Court’s previous orders dismissing his complaints with leave to amend and its denial of his request
to file a 100-page response to the OSC. See Docket No. 74. Plaintiff claimed that he was unable to
maintain information to prosecute this case due to losses and thefts of his laptop, USB drives, cellphones,
computer, backpack, hard drive, and SD cards on various dates in 2015 and 2016 and “was unable to file
a Third Amended Complaint by January 18, 2017 due to the recent theft of flash drives and files.” Id. at 16.
The Court notes that Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and does not have a lawyer. Parties to an action
who are proceeding without counsel often face special challenges in federal court. Plaintiff is advised that
Public Counsel runs a free Federal Pro Se Clinic at the Los Angeles federal courthouse where pro se litigants
can get information and guidance. The clinic is located in Room G-19, Main Street Floor, of the United
States Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. For more information, litigants
may call [phone] (x 270) or they may visit the Pro Se Home Page found at
http://court.cacd.uscourts.gov/cacd/ProSe.nsf . Clinic information is found there by clicking "Pro Se Clinic CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 13-06030-ODW (AS)

Date

March 17, 2017

Title

Oliver B. Mitchell v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, et. al.,

Los Angeles." Plaintiff may wish to avail himself of the services provided by the Pro Se Clinic.
Since Plaintiff has failed to timely file a Third Amended Complaint, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
THAT Plaintiff shall, by no later than April 17, 2017, show cause in writing why this action should not be
dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. This Order will be
discharged upon the filing of a Third Amended Complaint that cures the deficiencies in the last pleading,
or upon the filing of a declaration under penalty of perjury stating why Plaintiff is unable to file a Third
Amended Complaint.
If Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this action, he may request a voluntary dismissal pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) but Plaintiff cannot make any such request contingent on receiving
other relief. A notice of dismissal form is attached for Plaintiff’s convenience. Plaintiff is warned that
failure to timely respond to this Order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed
with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and obey court
orders.
cc: Otis D. Wright
United States District Judge

0
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

:

00

AF

Page 2 of 2