Garcia v. California Department of Corrections Medical Department of Delano

Filing 11

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not be Dismissed for Failure to Follow Court Order and Failure to Prosecute, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/29/16. Show Cause Response Due Within Twenty One Days.(Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

EDWIN GARCIA,

11

Plaintiff,

12

v.

13

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO FOLLOW COURT ORDER
AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

CDCR MEDICAL DEPARTMENT,

14

Case No. 1:16-cv-00237 DLB

Defendant.
_____________________________________/

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE
15
Plaintiff Edwin Garcia (“Plaintiff”), a state inmate in the custody of the California

16

17 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), is proceeding pro se and in forma
1
18 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on

19 February 19, 2016.
On May 11, 2016, the Court screened the complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend.

20

21 An amended complaint was due within thirty (30) days. Over thirty (30) days have passed and he
22 has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise contacted the Court.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, if any he has, why this action

23

24 should not be dismissed for failure to follow a Court order and failure to prosecute. Plaintiff must
25 file a response to this order within twenty-one (21) days. Plaintiff may also comply by filing an
26 amended complaint pursuant to the May 11, 2016, order.
27 ///
28

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge on April 18, 2016.

1

Failure to follow this order will result in dismissal of this action.

2
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

June 29, 2016

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2