Frank Brocato v. LAPD Officer Antonio Perez et al

Filing 23

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE by Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 6/10/2015. [See Order for details.] (san)

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

CV 13-8993-CJC (JEM)

Date

May 27, 2015

Frank Brocato v. LAPD Officer Antonio Perez, et al.

Present: The Honorable

John E. McDermott, United States Magistrate Judge

S. Anthony
Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None Present

None Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL
FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff lodged for filing his initial complaint,
along with an in forma pauperis application in order to proceed without payment of the
full filing fee (IFP Application), on December 5, 2013. (Docket No. 1.) Because
Plaintiff requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court screened the complaint
for the purpose of determining whether the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a
claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is
immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A. The Court issued an Order to
Show Cause (“OSC”) why Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application should not be denied
for failure to allege a cognizable claim. (Docket No. 2.) On September 18, 2014,
Plaintiff lodged for filing his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). The Court granted
Plaintiff’s IFP Application and the FAC was filed on December 9, 2014. (Docket Nos. 9,
10.)
On April 13, 2015, the Court issued an Order Dismissing First Amended
Complaint with Leave to Amend within thirty days. Plaintiff was explicitly cautioned
that failure to file a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) by the deadline set forth in the
Court’s Order of April 13, 2015, could result in a recommendation that this action be
dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with a court order.
The May 13, 2015, deadline to file the SAC has passed, and no SAC has been
filed.
In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this
CV-90 (12/02)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with a
Court order. Plaintiff shall file a written response to this Order to Show Cause no later
than June 10, 2015.1 Plaintiff’s failure to respond in writing to the Order to Show Cause
by the deadline may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure
to prosecute and/or failure to comply with a court order.
Filing of a Second Amended Complaint consistent with the requirements of the
Court’s Order of April 13, 2015, shall be a satisfactory response to the Order to Show
Cause.
No extensions of this deadline will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
cc: Parties
:
Initials of Deputy Clerk

sa

1

Pursuant to Rule 78 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 7-15, oral argument on this
Order to Show Cause will not be heard unless ordered by the Court. Upon the filing of a Response, the Order
to Show Cause will stand submitted.
CV-90 (12/02)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2