Clark v. Boyle et al

Filing 31

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/18/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

PETER CLARK,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. C 12-3559 RS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

14
15

CHARLES BOYLE, et al.,

16

Defendants
____________________________________/

17
18

Plaintiff Peter Clark, appearing in pro per, filed this action in July of 2012. Pursuant to 28

19

U.S.C. §1915, Clark’s in forma pauperis application was granted, and the original complaint

20

dismissed, with leave to amend, for reasons set out in an order entered on January 17, 2013.

21

Thereafter, Clark requested and was granted several extensions of time to file an amended

22

complaint. Clark represented that additional time was warranted both because of pending

23

developments in a purportedly related arbitration proceeding and/or bankruptcy matter, and because

24

he was diligently seeking counsel to represent him here.

25

In October of 2013, Clark finally filed an amended complaint, still without the benefit of

26

representation by counsel. Although the adequacy of that complaint has not yet been conclusively

27

determined under a 28 U.S.C. §1915 review, it plainly does not address all of the defects identified

28

in the prior dismissal order. Simultaneously with the filing of the amended complaint, Clark filed

1

an amended case management conference statement in which he expressly requested additional time

2

to obtain representation and to allow for resolution of certain issues in the arbitration and/or

3

bankruptcy proceedings. The case management conference was therefore continued to February

4

20, 2014, and further evaluation of the adequacy of the amended complaint was deferred.

5

In the more than four months that have followed, Clark has not obtained counsel or provided

6

any further information, and it appears he may have abandoned this action. Accordingly, the case

7

management conference set for February 20, 2014 is vacated. No later than February 27, 2014,

8

Clark shall file a declaration, not to exceed 15 pages, showing cause, if any, why this action should

9

not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. If no filing is made, the action will be
dismissed without further notice.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Dated: 2/18/14
RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

2