(PC) Fordyce v. Shirley et al

Filing 20

ORDER Directing Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE why this Matter should not be Dismissed for Failure to Obey a Court Order; Plaintiff's Showing of Cause or, in the Alternative, her First Amended Complaint due in Thirty Days signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 03/09/2025. Show Cause Response due in Thirty-Days. (Deputy Clerk EF)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JOSHUA FORDYCE, A.K.A. BRITTANY
FORDYCE,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.
HEATHER SHIRLEY, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

No. 1:25-cv-00106 GSA (PC)
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY THIS MATTER SHOULD NOT
BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO OBEY A
COURT ORDER
(ECF No. 10)
PLAINTIFF’S SHOWING OF CAUSE OR, IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, HER FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE IN THIRTY
DAYS

18
19

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil

20

rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States

21

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

22

For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff will be ordered to show cause why this matter

23

should not be dismissed for failure to obey a court order. As an alternative to filing the showing

24

of cause, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint. Plaintiff will be given thirty days to take

25

either course of action.

26

I.

27

On January 29, 2025, Plaintiff’s complaint was screened. See generally ECF No. 10. The

28

RELEVANT FACTS

screening order found that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be
1

1

granted. Id. at 7. As a result, Plaintiff was given thirty days to file an amended complaint. Id.

2

The thirty-day period Plaintiff had to file an amended complaint has passed and Plaintiff

3

has not filed an amended complaint, nor has Plaintiff requested an extension of time to do so.

4

Instead, since the issuance of the Court’s order, Plaintiff has filed three motions for the

5

appointment of counsel. See ECF Nos. 12, 14, 16. Each of those motions have been denied. See

6

ECF Nos. 13, 15, 17.

7

II.

DISCUSSION

8

Both the Court and the public have an interest in the disposal of cases in an expedient

9

manner. See generally Hernandez v. City of El Monte, 138 F.3d 393, 399 (9th Cir. 1998)

10

(presuming public has interest in expeditious litigation). Plaintiff’s failure to file an amended

11

complaint as ordered has stalled this process, and it warrants the Court issuing an order directing

12

Plaintiff to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for

13

failure to obey a court order. Plaintiff will be given thirty days to do so. As an alternative to

14

Plaintiff filing a showing of cause, within the same thirty-day period, Plaintiff may instead file the

15

first amended complaint as she was previously ordered to do.

16

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

17

1. Plaintiff is ordered to SHOW CAUSE why this matter should not be DISMISSED for

18
19
20

failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order;
2. As an alternative to filing a showing of cause, Plaintiff may file a first amended
complaint, and

21

3. Plaintiff shall have thirty days to take either course of action.

22

Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to comply with this order within the time allotted

23

may result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed.

24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 9, 2025

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
2