Lipsey v. Reddy et al

Filing 62

ORDER Discharging Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Failure to Obey Court Order 60 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 7/18/2018. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

CHRISTOPHER LIPSEY, JR.,
Plaintiff,

11
vs.

12
13

DR. REDDY, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

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

Case No.: 1:17-cv-00569-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD
NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO OBEY
COURT ORDER
(Doc. 60)

16
Plaintiff Christopher Lipsey is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

17
18

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On May 2, 2018, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.

19
20

(Doc. 45.) The Court did not receive any timely response to the motion, nor had Plaintiff

21

otherwise been in contact with the Court since he filed a motion for preliminary injunction on

22

May 29, 2018. (Doc. 49.)
On July 17, 2017, the Court issued an order to show cause why this action should not be

23
24

dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey the Court’s order and for failure to prosecute.

25

(Doc. 60.) The Court ordered that Plaintiff could comply by responding to Defendants’

26

summary judgment motion. (Id.) After the order was issued, the Court received Plaintiff’s

27

opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, (Doc. 58), as supplemented, (Doc. 59).

28

///

1

1

Based on Plaintiff’s compliance, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that the order to show

2

cause issued on July 17, 2018 (Doc. 60), is discharged. The Court will issue findings and

3

recommendations on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in due course.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

July 18, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2