Brown v. Karlow et al

Filing 24

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Action should not be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Failure to Follow Court Order; Thirty-Day Deadline signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 2/29/2016. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

E’DRICK BROWN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
PETERSON,

15

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:14cv00705 DLB PC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE
TO FOLLOW COURT ORDER
THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff E’drick Brown (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed this action on May 12, 2014. Pursuant to Court
order, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on November 5, 2014.1

20

On March 31, 2015, the Court dismissed the First Amended Complaint with leave to
21
22
23
24

amend. Plaintiff requested and received three extensions of time within which to file an
amended complaint. After the time for filing passed, the Court issued an order to show cause on
September 11, 2015.
On October 15, 2015, the Court discharged the order to show cause after Plaintiff filed a

25
26

response indicating that he had been on lockdown at his place of incarceration. Plaintiff was

27

given an additional thirty (30) days to file his amended complaint.

28

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge on May 21, 2014.
1

1
2
3
4

On November 30, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for additional time and
granted another thirty (30) days for Plaintiff to file his amended complaint.
On January 4, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay this action. He stated that he had
been transferred in October 2015, and that staff could not locate his legal property. The Court

5

denied the stay on January 7, 2016, but granted Plaintiff another thirty (30) day extension of
6
7
8
9
10

time. The Court noted that separation from property after transfer is generally a temporary issue.
Well over thirty (30) days have passed and Plaintiff has not filed his amended complaint
or otherwise contacted the Court.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, if any he has, why this action

11

should not be dismissed for his failure to follow a Court order and failure to prosecute. Plaintiff

12

must file a response to this order within thirty (30) days of the date of service.

13

Plaintiff may also comply with this order by filing an amended complaint pursuant to the

14

March 31, 2015, order. As this action has pending since May 2014, and Plaintiff has had since

15

March 31, 2015, to file an amended complaint, extensions of time will not be granted absent

16
17

extraordinary circumstances.
Failure to respond will result in dismissal of this action.

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

February 29, 2016

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2