Forbes v. Patel, et al.

Filing 11

ORDER Directing Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Failure to Obey a Court Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/8/16: 14-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT FORBES,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
DR. PATEL, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00707-BAM PC
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE
DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER
FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE

18

Plaintiff Robert Forbes (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

19

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this action on May

20

20, 2016. Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge. (ECF No. 5.)

21

On September 15, 2016, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to file an amended

22

complaint or notify the Court that he is willing to proceed on the claims the Court found cognizable

23

within thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 10.) On September 23, 2016, that order was returned by the United

24

States Post Office as undeliverable, because Plaintiff was “discharged.” Plaintiff has not provided the

25

Court with his current address, responded to the Court’s September 14, 2016 order, or otherwise

26

communicated with the Court.

27
28

Pursuant to Local Rules 182 and 183, a pro se party is under a continuing duty to notify the
Clerk, the Court and all other parties of any change of address or telephone number. Local Rule
1

1

182(f), 183(b). Additionally, Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure . . . of a party to comply with

2

these [Local] Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any

3

and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Further, the failure of Plaintiff to

4

prosecute this action is grounds for dismissal. In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability

5

Litigation, 460 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 2006).

6

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days from the date of

7

service of this order, Plaintiff shall show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for

8

failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. The failure to respond to this order will result

9

in dismissal of this action.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

December 8, 2016

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2