Pringle v. Walmart Distribution Center

Filing 39

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for Plaintiff's Failure to Appear and Failure to Obey a Court Order signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 10/15/2020. Show Cause Response due within twenty-one (21) days. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 AL PRINGLE, 8 9 10 11 12 Case No. 1:19-cv-00468-BAM Plaintiff, v. WALMART DISTRIBUTION CENTER, et al., (Doc. No. 38) Defendants. TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE 13 14 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO APPEAR AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER On September 4, 2020, the Court granted the motion of Woosik Isaac Maing to withdraw 15 as counsel of record for Plaintiff Al Pringle (“Plaintiff”), and substituted Plaintiff in propria 16 persona. (Doc. No. 37.) By separate order, the Court set a telephonic status conference for 17 October 15, 2020, to address whether Plaintiff had secured new counsel or intended to represent 18 himself in propria persona. (Doc. No. 38.) A copy of the Court’s order setting the conference 19 was served on Plaintiff at his last known address. 20 On October 15, 2020, Plaintiff failed to appear at the telephonic status conference. 21 Pursuant to Local Rule 110, “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with . . . any 22 order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . 23 within the inherent power of the Court.” L.R. 110. The Court has the inherent power to control its 24 docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including 25 dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000). 26 Accordingly, Plaintiff Al Pringle is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing 27 within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of this order why sanctions should not be 28 imposed against him for his failure to obey a court order and failure to appear at the October 15, 1 1 2020 telephonic status conference. In any response to this Order, Plaintiff shall explain how he 2 intends to proceed in this case. 3 4 Failure to respond to this order will result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this action for failure to comply with court orders. 5 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara October 15, 2020 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 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?