Harris v. Quillen et al

Filing 98

ORDER for Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not be Dismissed, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 02/15/2022. Show Cause Response Due Within Twenty-Days. (Maldonado, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DEVONTE B. HARRIS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
T. QUILLEN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:17-cv-01370-DAD-SAB (PC)
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
(ECF No. 97)

17

Plaintiff Devonte B. Harris is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants Alvarado, Carranza-Rico,

19

Hurtado, Perez and Quillen for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. This matter is

20

set for a telephonic trial confirmation hearing on April 11, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. before District Judge

21

Dale A. Drozd.
On September 29, 2021, the Court issued a second scheduling order directing Plaintiff to file,

22
23

among other things, his pretrial statement on or before February 4, 2022. (ECF No. 97.) The deadline

24

for Plaintiff’s pretrial statement has expired, and Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s

25

scheduling order or to otherwise communicate with the Court.

26

///

27

///

28

///
1

Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to show cause by written response why this

1
2

action should not be dismissed for failure to obey the court’s order and for failure to prosecute.

3

Plaintiff’s response is due within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order. If Plaintiff

4

fails to file a response, or the response does not demonstrate good cause, the undersigned will

5

recommend dismissal of the action.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated:

9

February 15, 2022
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2