Armstrong v. Agurerralde et al

Filing 39

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Comply With a Court Order signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 6/27/2014. Show Cause Response due within fifteen (15) days. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRADY K. ARMSTRONG,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
J. AGUERERRALDE, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:12-cv-01622-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE
TO COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER
[ECF No. 31]

Plaintiff Brady K. Armonstrong is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On April 8, 2014, the Court found Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim for retaliation against

20

Defendant J. Agurerralde and forwarded Plaintiff the necessary service of document forms for

21

completion and return to the Court within thirty days. The thirty day period of time has expired and

22

Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order.

23

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, “Failure of counsel or of a party to

24

comply with … any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all

25

sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court. Local Rule 110. “District Courts have inherent

26

power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that power, a court may impose sanctions including

27

dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Authority of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir.

28

1986). A court may dismiss an action with prejudice, based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action
1

1

or failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g., Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

2

F.2d 1258, 1260-1261 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with an order requiring

3

amendment of complaint); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal

4

for failure to comply with a court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986)

5

(dismissal for failure to prosecute and to comply with local rules).

6

Within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall show cause in

7

writing why the instant action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order.

8

Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of the action.

9
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 27, 2014
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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