Sheldon Newsome v. Amanda Dillion et al

Filing 81

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Lack of Prosecution by Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, on or before July 7, 2017, Plaintiff shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution. If Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue his claims, he may file a notice of voluntary dismissal. If Plaintiff fails to timely respond to this Order, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice due to Plaintiff's failure to diligently prosecute his claims. (see document for details). (dro)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:15-cv-08043-AB (KES)

Date: June 23, 2017

Title: SHELDON NEWSOME v. AMANDA DILLION, et al.
PRESENT:
THE HONORABLE KAREN E. SCOTT, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Jazmin Dorado
Courtroom Clerk

Not Present
Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR
PLAINTIFF:
None Present

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR
DEFENDANT:
None Present

PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS):

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Why This Action Should Not Be
Dismissed for Lack of Prosecution

On October 14, 2015, Plaintiff filed a civil rights Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Dkt.
1.) Defendants were served and moved to dismiss. (Dkt. 42, 46.) On May 3, 2016, the Court
granted the motions and dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend. (Dkt. 51.)
Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on December 27, 2016. (Dkt. 67.) Defendants
again moved to dismiss. (Dkt. 71, 72.) On May 3, 2017, the Court dismissed the First Amended
Complaint without prejudice. (Dkt. 80.) The Court stated, “If Plaintiff still desires to pursue his
claims, he shall file a Second Amended Complaint within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of
this Order,” i.e., May 31, 2017. (Id. at 20.) The Court admonished Plaintiff that “if he fails to
timely file a Second Amended Complaint, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed
with prejudice for failure to diligently prosecute.” (Id.)
As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed a Second Amended Complaint or any
further documents with the Court.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, on or before July 7, 2017, Plaintiff shall show cause why
this action should not be dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution. If Plaintiff no longer
wishes to pursue his claims, he may file a notice of voluntary dismissal. If Plaintiff fails to timely
respond to this Order, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice
due to Plaintiff’s failure to diligently prosecute his claims.
Initials of Deputy Clerk JD