Thomas v. Stanislaus County et al

Filing 40

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF to SHOW CAUSE why Sanctions Should not be Imposed for Failure to File Pretrial Statement signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 04/09/2013. Show Cause Response due by 4/29/2013. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 DERRICK J. THOMAS, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02015-AWI-SKO PC ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILING TO FILE PRETRIAL STATEMENT v. STANISLAUS COUNTY, et al., (Doc. 32) 13 Defendants. FIFTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff Derrick J. Thomas, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this 17 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 17, 2009. This action is proceeding 18 on Plaintiff’s amended complaint against Defendants Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors, 19 Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff Adam Christianson, Policy Manager Gina Leguria, 20 Captain William Duncan, Lieutenants Ronald Lloyd and Gregg Clifton, and Sergeant M. White 21 arising out of their failure to ensure Plaintiff was provided with adequate outdoor exercise, in 22 violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 23 This matter is set for a telephonic trial confirmation hearing on May 28, 2013, and jury trial 24 on July 9, 2013. Pursuant to the second scheduling order filed on October 2, 2012, Plaintiff’s pretrial 25 statement was due on or before April 1, 2013, and Plaintiff was warned that the failure to comply 26 with the order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the action. Plaintiff 27 did not file a pretrial statement. 28 /// 1 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall show 3 cause why sanctions should not be imposed against him for failing to file a pretrial 4 statement in compliance with the second scheduling order; and 5 2. 6 7 The failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action, with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 Dated: 0m8i78 April 9, 2013 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?