Charles Cromer v. Carrebello et al

Filing 7

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with court order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 5/2/2016. Show Cause Response due by 6/6/2016.(Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CHARLES CROMER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
VICTOR CARREBELLO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

1:15-cv-01810-EPG-PC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
CASE SHOULD NOT BE
DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER
THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE TO
RESPOND

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28

I.

BACKGROUND
Charles Cromer (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on
December 3, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) On January 28, 2016, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint,
which awaits the Court’s requisite screening. (ECF No. 5.)
On February 10, 2016, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (ECF No. 6.)
Therefore, pursuant to Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of
California, the undersigned shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as
reassignment to a District Judge is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3).
On December 14, 2015, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to either pay the
filing fee for this action or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis, within thirty
1

1

days. (ECF No. 3.) The Court sent Plaintiff the Court’s form application to proceed in forma

2

pauperis, to complete and return to the Court. (Id.) The thirty-day period has now expired, and

3

Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis, or

4

otherwise responded to the Court’s order.

5

The Court has discretion to impose any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule

6

or within the inherent power of the Court, including dismissal of an action, based on the

7

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with a Court order. Local Rule 110.

8

II.

9
10

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is required to show cause why this case should not be

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to obey the Court’s order, within thirty days.

11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1.

Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a

13

written response to the Court, showing cause why this case should not be

14

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to obey the Court’s order of December 14, 2015;

15

and

16

2.

17

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this
case without further notice.

18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 2, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
2