Harris v. German et al

Filing 120

ORDER for Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE Why This Case Should Not Now be Dismissed Based on Plaintiff's Apparent Falsehood signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 9/13/2022. Show Cause Response due within twenty (20) days. (Lawrence, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DEVONTE B. HARRIS,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.
GERMAN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

1:15-cv-01462-DAD-GSA-PC
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT
NOW BE DISMISSED BASED ON
PLAINTIFF’S APPARENT FALSEHOOD
(ECF No. 117.)
TWENTY-DAY DEADLINE

16
17

On August 5, 2022, the Court issued an order to show cause requiring Plaintiff to respond

18

within 20 days showing cause why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to file his

19

pretrial statement. (ECF No. 114.) On August 31, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for a 14-day

20

extension of time to respond to the order to show cause. (ECF No. 117.) Plaintiff declared, under

21

penalty of perjury, that he was not able to access the library before the order to show cause

22

deadline. (Declaration of Devonte B. Harris, ECF No. 117 at 2 ¶ 2.)

23

On September 2, 2022, Defendants filed the declaration of P. Williams, Litigation

24

Coordinator for Corcoran State Prison, who provided evidence that contrary to Plaintiff’s

25

allegations, Plaintiff had been to the law library nine times between June 9, 2022 and August 15,

26

2022, on the following dates:

27

a.

June 9, 2022;

28

b.

June 16, 2022;

1

c.

June 23 2022;

2

d.

June 27, 2022;

3

e.

July 7, 2022;

4

f.

July 11, 2022;

5

g.

July 19, 2022;

6

h.

July 26, 2022;

7

i.

August 15, 2022.

8

(Declaration of P. Williams, ECF No. 118 at 2 ¶ 4.) This evidence shows that Plaintiff attended

9

the law library on August 15, 2022, which was well before the deadline for Plaintiff to respond

10

to the Court’s order to show cause issued on August 5th. (Id. at 17.) This evidence is clearly

11

contrary to Plaintiff’s declaration in which Plaintiff declares, under penalty of perjury, that he

12

was not able to access the library before the above mentioned deadline to respond the court’s

13

order to show cause.

14

Interestingly, it further appears that Plaintiff attended the law library on 7 (seven) separate

15

occasions between March 3, 2021, the date of the order which set Plaintiff’s deadline to file his

16

pretrial statement, and July 26, 2022 when it was due.

17

Therefore, within 20 days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required to

18

respond to this order showing cause why this case should not be dismissed based on the apparent

19

falsehood written by Plaintiff in his declaration.

20

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

21

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty days of the date of service

22

of this order, Plaintiff is ordered to file a response to this order, showing cause why this case

23

should not be dismissed based on the apparent falsehood written by Plaintiff in his declaration.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 13, 2022

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE