Vail v. City of Sacramento

Filing 35

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/15/18 ORDERING that within 14 days from the date of this order, the court will issue plaintiff an order to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed due to plaintiff's lack of prosecution-unless defendant has filed a responsive pleading. If defendant has filed a responsive pleading, the court will forgo such an order, and plaintiff should respond to defendant's pleading accordingly. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRENCE VAIL,

12

No. 2:16-cv-2673 DB PS

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ORDER

CITY OF SACRAMENTO,

15

Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff commenced this action on November 10, 2016 by filing a complaint and paying

18

the required filing fee. (ECF No. 1.) Defendant City of Sacramento filed a motion to dismiss on

19

June 20, 2017. (ECF No. 16.) By order signed February 6, 2018, plaintiff’s complaint was

20

dismissed and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects

21

noted in that order.1 (ECF No. 26.)
Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on June 21, 2018. (ECF No. 33.) Defendant City of

22
23

Sacramento has failed to file a responsive pleading. “Rule 55 provides a ‘two-step process’ for

24

the entry of judgment against a party who fails to defend: first, the entry of a default, and second,

25

the entry of a default judgment.” City of New York v. Mickalis Pawn Shop, LLC, 645 F.3d 114,

26

128 (2nd Cir. 2011) (quoting New York v. Green, 420 F.3d 99, 104 (2nd Cir. 2005)).

27
28

1

The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF No. 12.)
1

1

The parties are advised that within fourteen days from the date of this order, the court will

2

issue plaintiff an order to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed due to

3

plaintiff’s lack of prosecution—unless defendant has filed a responsive pleading. If defendant

4

has filed a responsive pleading, the court will forgo such an order, and plaintiff should respond to

5

defendant’s pleading accordingly.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 15, 2018

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

DLB:6
DB/orders/orders.consent/vail2673.osc5

24
25
26
27
28
2