G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Shahen et al

Filing 34

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/19/11 ORDERING that no later than 01/06/12, plaintiff shall show cause in writing why: (1) it failed to file the supplemental briefing authorized by the court; (2) it or its couns el should not be sanctioned for such failure; and (3) why plaintiff's action should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). No later than 01/06/12, plaintiff may file the supplemental briefing authorized by the court . Plaintiff's failure to comply with any portion of this Order to Show Cause shall serve as additional grounds for, and plaintiff's consent to, the dismissal of plaintiff's action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

G & G CLOSED CIRCUIT EVENTS,
LLC,

11
Plaintiff,

No. 2:10-cv-00814 GEB KJN

12
v.
13
MARCUS LEE SHAHEN, et al.,
14
Defendants.
15

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
/

16

On November 3, 2011, the court heard plaintiff’s motion for default judgment

17

(Dkt. No. 26).1 The court submitted plaintiff’s motion, but permitted plaintiff to file

18

supplemental briefing addressing multiple discrepancies or issues raised by the record in this case

19

that preclude entry of a default judgment. Plaintiff was required to file such supplemental

20

briefing on or before December 5, 2011. Plaintiff failed to file any supplemental brief.

21

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

22

1.

No later than January 6, 2012, plaintiff shall show cause in writing why:

23

(1) it failed to file the supplemental briefing authorized by the court; (2) it or its counsel should

24

not be sanctioned for such failure; and (3) why plaintiff’s action should not be dismissed

25
1

26

This action proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California
Local Rule 302(c)(19) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1

1

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).2

2
3

2.

No later than January 6, 2012, plaintiff may file the supplemental briefing

authorized by the court.

4

3.

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with any portion of this Order to Show Cause

5

shall serve as additional grounds for, and plaintiff’s consent to, the dismissal of plaintiff’s action

6

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

DATED: December 19, 2011

9
10

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

2

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), a district court may dismiss an
action for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
failure to comply with the court’s local rules, or failure to comply with the court’s orders. See,
e.g., Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991) (recognizing that a court “may act sua
sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute”); Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S.
Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (recognizing that courts may dismiss an action
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute
or comply with the rules of civil procedure or the court’s orders); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d
1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the district court
may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court.”), cert. denied, 506 U.S.
915 (1992); Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir. 2002) (affirming district
court’s dismissal of case for failure to prosecute when habeas petitioner failed to file a first
amended petition), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 909 (2003). This court’s Local Rules are in accord.
See E. Dist. Local Rule 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with
any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions
authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.”); E. Dist. Local
Rule 183(a) (providing that a pro se party’s failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the court’s Local Rules, and other applicable law may support, among other things,
dismissal of that party’s action).
2