Walker v. Wechsler, et al.
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why the Action Should Not be Dismissed for Plaintiff's Failure to Prosecute signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/23/2017. Show Cause Response due within thirty (30) days. (Jessen, A)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WECHSLER, et al.,
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO
30 DAY DEADLINE
On April 18, 2017, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss this action under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(A), to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant, and to require him to post security. (Doc.
26.) “Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding
party not more than twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion.” L.R. 230 (l).
On the notice of the motion, Defendant advised Plaintiff that, unless otherwise ordered, this
motion is submitted on the record without oral argument and his “[f]ailure to file an opposition
may result in the granting of the motion.” (Doc. 26, p. 2.) Despite this, more than thirty days
have lapsed since Defendant filed the motion to dismiss and Plaintiff has not filed an opposition
or response of any kind.
A court may dismiss an action with prejudice, based on a party’s failure to prosecute an
action and failure to comply with local rules. Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th
Cir. 1986). “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that
power, a court may impose sanctions, including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing
Authority of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). The Local Rules, corresponding
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, provide, “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with . . . any order
of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within
the inherent power of the Court.” L.R. 110.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause within 30 days of the date of service
of this Order why this action should not be dismissed based on his failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
May 23, 2017
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
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?