Khouanmany v. United States Marshals et al

Filing 191

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 9/23/2022 ORDERING plaintiff to show cause, within 21 days, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the court's local rules. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, plaintiff shall, within 21 days, file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants' 188 motion for summary judgment. (Yin, K)

Case 2:17-cv-01326-TLN-JDP Document 191 Filed 09/26/22 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VILAYCHITH KHOUANMANY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:17-cv-01326-TLN-JDP (PC)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE
TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL RULES

BEN ALENCASTRE, et al.,
Defendants.

RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE
DAYS

16
17
On August 11, 2022, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 188. To
18
date, plaintiff has not filed a response to defendants’ motion.
19
In cases where a party is incarcerated and proceeding without counsel, a responding party
20
is required to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition not more twenty-one days after the
21

date the motion is served. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(l). Failure “to file an opposition or to file a

22
statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the
23

motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions.” Id.

24
To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines.
25
The court may impose sanctions, including dismissal of a case, for failure to comply with court
26
orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council
27
v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41
28
1

Case 2:17-cv-01326-TLN-JDP Document 191 Filed 09/26/22 Page 2 of 2
1

(9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to

2

administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v.

3

Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.

4

Plaintiff will be given a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for

5

his failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion.

6

Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and

7

will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to

8

show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute

9

and for failure to comply with the court’s local rules. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this

10

lawsuit, he shall, within twenty-one days, file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to

11

defendants’ motion.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
Dated:
15
16

September 23, 2022
JEREMY D. PETERSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2