Martinez v. Three Unknown Guards of CDCR, et al.

Filing 62

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why Action Should not be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Failure to Obey Court Orders signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 01/24/2020. Fourteen-Day Deadline. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANTONIO MARTINEZ,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:16-cv-01467-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE
TO OBEY COURT ORDERS

F. ROJAS,
(ECF Nos. 52, 55, 57, 59)
Defendant.
FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE
Plaintiff Antonio Martinez is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On September 10, 2019, Defendant F. Rojas filed a motion for summary judgment for

20

failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 52.) Plaintiff was provided with notice of

21

the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934

22

(9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir.1988); Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849

23

F.2d 409, 411–12 (9th Cir.1988). (ECF No. 52-1.)

24

On October 9, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff a thirty-day extension of time to file an

25

opposition to Defendant’s summary judgment motion. (ECF No. 55.) However, Plaintiff failed

26

to file an opposition within the allotted time. Therefore, on November 21, 2019, the Court issued

27

an order directing Plaintiff to file an opposition, or a statement of non-opposition, to Defendant’s

28

motion for summary judgment within twenty-one days from the date of service of the order.
1

1
2

(ECF No. 57.)
In response to the Court’s November 21, 2019 order, Plaintiff filed a motion for a second

3

extension of time. (ECF No. 58.) On December 9, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff a second

4

thirty-day extension of time to file an opposition to Defendant’s summary judgment motion.

5

(ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff’s opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to Defendant’s motion for

6

summary judgment was therefore due on or before Monday, January 13, 2020.

7

To date, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to

8

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, nor has Plaintiff otherwise communicated with the

9

Court. Plaintiff will be permitted one final opportunity to show cause why this action should not

10
11

be dismissed with prejudice.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days from the date of

12

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

13

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s October 9, 2019, November 21, 2019,

14

and December 9, 2019 orders and failure to prosecute. Plaintiff may comply with this order to

15

show cause by filing an opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to Defendant’s motion for

16

summary judgment. Plaintiff is warned that failure to comply with this order to show cause

17

will result in a recommendation to the District Judge that this action be dismissed for

18

failure to prosecute and failure to obey court orders.

19
20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

January 24, 2020

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2