Manago v. Davey et al
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why case should not be dismissed for Plaintiff's Failure to Prosecute, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 08/17/17. Show Cause Response due 14-Day Deadline(Martin-Gill, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO
D. DAVEY, et al.,
FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE FOR
PLAINTIFF TO FILE A RESPONSE
Stewart Manago (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding in propria persona
and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff
filed the Complaint commencing this action on March 24, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) This case now
proceeds with the First Amended Complaint filed on April 18, 2016, against defendants J.
Acevedo, D. Davey, A. Maxfield, E. Razo, M.V. Sexton, A. Valdez, and J. Vanderpoel
(collectively, “Defendants”), on Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claims. (ECF No. 13.)
On August 4, 2017, Plaintiff’s court mail was returned to the court by the United States
Postal Service as undeliverable, with a notation on the envelope “VACANT.” (Court Record.)
Plaintiff has not notified the court of his new address. Plaintiff shall be required to show cause
why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to prosecute this action. Local Rule
183(b) requires that a party appearing in propria persona shall keep the court and opposing
parties advised of his or her current address. A court may dismiss an action, with prejudice,
based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action, or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g.,
Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for noncompliance with local
rule); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for failure to comply
with local rule requiring pro se plaintiffs to keep court apprised of address); Henderson v.
Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for lack of prosecution and failure to
comply with local rules).
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
Within (14) fourteen days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is
required to file a written response, showing cause why this case should not be
dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute; and
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this
action without further notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
August 17, 2017
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?