Abreu v. Jaime et al

Filing 26

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why this Action Should not be Dismissed for Failure to State a Claim, Failure to Obey a Court Order, and Failure to Prosecute signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 09/27/2017. Show Cause Response due by 10/23/2017.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ARMANDO ABREU, 12 Case No. 1:16-cv-00715-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, Defendants. 13 (ECF No. 25) v. 14 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER, AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE G. JAIME, et al., 15 16 TWENTY (20) DAY DEADLINE 17 18 Plaintiff Armando Abreu (“Plaintiff”) is a 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 20 May 23, 2016. 21 On June 21, 2017, the Court issued a screening order dismissing the third amended 22 complaint for failure to state a cognizable claim, and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended 23 complaint within thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 25.) On July 13, 2017, the Court’s order was 24 returned as Undeliverable, Inmate not at this Institution. The deadline to file an amended 25 complaint has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, provided the Court with 26 his current address, or otherwise communicated with the Court regarding this action. 27 Pursuant to Local Rules 182 and 183, a pro se party is under a continuing duty to notify 28 the Clerk, the Court and all other parties of any change of address or telephone number. Local 1 1 Rules 182(f), 183(b). Additionally, Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure . . . of a party to 2 comply with these [Local] Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by 3 the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Further, the failure 4 of Plaintiff to prosecute this action is grounds for dismissal. In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) 5 Products Liability Litigation, 460 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 2006). 6 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause in writing, within 7 twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, why this action should not be dismissed, 8 with prejudice, for failure to state a claim, failure to comply with the Court’s June 21, 2017 order, 9 and failure to prosecute. Plaintiff can comply with this order to show cause by filing a notice 10 informing the Court of his current address and filing an amended complaint. The failure to 11 respond to this order will result in dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to 12 state a claim, failure to obey a court order, and failure to prosecute. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara September 27, 2017 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?