Frost v. United States Department of Justice

Filing 134

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ORDER DISMISSING UNSERVED DEFENDANTS AND FINAL JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE RE-ENTERED. Show Cause Response due by 11/23/2020. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on October 23, 2020. (jcslc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2020)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

VINTON P. FROST,

Case No. 17-cv-01240-JCS

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

9
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE,

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Defendant.

12
13

On May 15, 2017, the Court dismissed with prejudice two unserved defendants, Melanie

14

Ann Pustay and Sean O’Neill, who were sued in their official capacities as employees of the

15

Department of Justice. The Court dismissed the Office of Information Policy (a division of the

16

Department of Justice) on June 28, 2017, and subsequently granted motions for summary

17

judgment in favor of the remaining Defendant, the Department of Justice, on April 4, 2018 and

18

March 13, 2019. The Court entered judgment in favor of the Department of Justice on March 13,

19

2019. See Dkt. Nos. 95, 119, 120. Plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit and on June 25, 2020,

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded because the dismissed, unserved defendants (Defendants
Pustay and O’Neill) had not consented to proceed before a magistrate judge before they were
dismissed. See Dkt. No. 124 (Ninth Circuit Order). The Court of Appeals did not address
Plaintiff’s appeal on the merits.
On July 20, 2020, counsel for the Department of Justice consented to magistrate judge
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) on behalf of all named defendants, including Pustay and
O’Neill. See Dkt. No. 127. The Court therefore ORDERS PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE why
it should not reenter its order dismissing Defendants Pustay and O’Neill and enter a new judgment

27
so that Plaintiff may proceed with his appeal on the merits. Plaintiff may file a written response to
28

1
2

this Order no later than November 23, 2020. No hearing will be held.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4
5
6

Dated: October 23, 2020
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
Chief Magistrate Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2