Kevin McNichols v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Filing 17

Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply With Court Orders by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 11/5/2015. (dts)

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

EDCV 15-262-KK

Title

Kevin McNichols v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Present: The
Honorable

Date

October 28, 2015

Kenly Kiya Kato, United States Magistrate Judge

Deb Taylor

None

None

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

Attorneys Present for Defendant:

None Present

None Present

Proceedings:

(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be
Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply With Court Orders

I.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On February 11, 2015, Kevin McNichols, filed a complaint challenging the denial
of his application for Title II Disability Insurance Benefits by the Commissioner of the
Social Security Administration. ECF No. 1.
On February 13, 2015, the Court issued a Case Management Order setting various
dates, including the date by which the parties were to file their Joint Stipulation. ECF
No. 9.
The date by which the parties were to have filed their Joint Stipulation – pursuant
to the Case Management Order – has now passed. The parties have not filed the Joint
Stipulation, nor requested an extension of time to do so.
II.
DISCUSSION
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the Court may dismiss an action with
prejudice for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with any court order. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(b).
Here, Plaintiff has failed to file a Joint Stipulation as ordered by the Court.
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

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

EDCV 15-262-KK

Date

Title

October 28, 2015

Kevin McNichols v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Consequently, under Rule 41(b), the Court may properly dismiss the instant action with
prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with a court order. However, before
dismissing this action, the Court will afford Plaintiff an opportunity to explain his failure
to file a Joint Stipulation.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this
action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with court orders.
Plaintiff shall have up to and including November 5, 2015, to respond to this Order.
Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to timely file a response to this Order will be deemed by
the Court as consent to the dismissal of this action with prejudice.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2