Abpikar v. Martin et al

Filing 33

ORDER To SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed, Twenty-One Day Deadline, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 3/11/2015. Show Cause Response due by 4/6/2015. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HASSAN ABPIKAR,

12
13

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:11-cv-01793 DLB PC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED

v.
TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

14
15

MARTIN, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Hassan Abpikar (“Plaintiff”), a former federal prisoner, is proceeding pro se and in

18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics

19

Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff filed his complaint on October 27, 2011. On August 27,

20

2012, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 17. On October 10, 2012, the Court

21

screened Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and found that it stated a cognizable First Amendment

22

claim against Defendant Benov, but failed to state any other claims against any other Defendants.

23

Plaintiff was provided the opportunity to file a second amended complaint to cure the deficiencies

24

identified. On April 1, 2013, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wished to proceed only against

25

Defendant Benov on the cognizable claim. Therefore, on April 8, 2013, the Court dismissed all

26

other claims and all other defendants. On the same date, the Court directed Plaintiff to complete and

27

return service documents. Plaintiff did so on May 6, 2013. On May 7, 2013, the Court directed the

28

U.S. Marshall to serve Defendant Benov. On July 12, 2013, Plaintiff notified the Court of his
1

1
2

release from custody. On August 7, 2013, the summons was returned executed. Since that time, no
action has been taken in this case and Plaintiff has not communicated with the Court in any manner.

3

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be

4
dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff shall file a response to this order within twenty-one (21)
5
days of the date of service.
6
Failure to show cause, or failure to respond to this order, will result in dismissal of this
7
action.
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
11

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

March 11, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2