Smith v. Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Correctional Facility

Filing 16

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURTS SCHEDULING ORDER DKT. 6 . An Order to Show Cause Hearing is set for 10/17/2024 at 10:30 AM. The Show Cause Response is due by 10/11/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter H. Kang on 9/26/2024. (jaf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2024)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

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

7
8

RYAN THOMAS SMITH,
Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

v.
HUMBOLDT COUNTY SHERIFF’S
OFFICE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,
Defendant.

Case No. 24-cv-01035-PHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH
COURT’S SCHEDULING ORDER [DKT.
6]
Show Cause Hearing SET for October 17,
2024 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom F, 15th
Floor, San Francisco Courthouse

13
14
15

Defendant Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office Correctional Facility is ORDERED TO

16

SHOW CAUSE why default should not be entered against Defendant for failure to defend this

17

action, where Defendant failed to comply with the Court’s Scheduling Order [Dkt. 6] under which

18

Defendant’s dispositive motion is three months overdue.

19

Plaintiff filed his pro se Complaint on February 21, 2024, and on the same day consented

20

to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. [Dkts. 1, 3]. On March 22, 2024, the Court screened the

21

Complaint, found that the Complaint stated either an Eighth Amendment or Fourteenth

22

Amendment claim against Defendant, and ordered service of process on Defendant. [Dkt. 6]. In

23

that same order, the Court entered a scheduling order “to expedite resolution of this case.” Id. at 3.

24

The Court’s scheduling order instructed Defendant to file a dipositive motion within 91 days of

25

March 22, 2024 (which was June 21, 2024), and instructed the parties that “[a]ny motion for an

26

extension of time must be filed no later than (and preferably well in advance of) the deadline

27

sought to be extended and must be accompanied by a showing of good cause.” Id. at 3-5. The

28

scheduling order further stated that, “[i]f Defendant is of the opinion that this case cannot be

United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

resolved by summary judgment, Defendant must so inform the Court prior to the date such

2

summary judgment motion is due.” Id. at 4.

3

On April 24, 2024, Defendant filed its Answer to the Complaint. [Dkt. 12]. On July 22,

4

2024, Defendant consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. [Dkt. 14]. Defendant’s deadline to

5

file a dispositive motion was June 21, 2024, yet no dispositive motion was filed. Court staff

6

contacted Defendant’s counsel in July 2024 and September 2024, reminding Defendant of the

7

dispositive motion deadline. As of the date of this Order to Show Cause, Defendant has not filed a

8

dispositive motion, has not requested that the briefing schedule be reset, has not requested an

9

extension of time to file their dispositive motion, and has not informed the Court that Defendant is

10

of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment. Other than the Answer and

11

consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, Defendant has filed no other documents in this case. In

12

sum, Defendant’s dispositive motion is nearly three months overdue without leave of Court.

13

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Defendant to show cause why default should

14

not be entered against Defendant for failure to defend this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55

15

(and to the extent applicable, pursuant to the Court’s inherent authority), where Defendant has

16

failed to comply with the Court’s Scheduling Order [Dkt. 6] under which Defendant’s dispositive

17

motion is three months overdue, despite numerous communications from the Court’s staff. In the

18

written response to this Order, Defendant shall, at a minimum, explain why they failed to timely file

19

a dispositive motion, failed to timely file a request that the briefing schedule be reset, failed to

20

timely file a request for an extension of time to file their dispositive motion, and failed to inform

21

the Court whether Defendant is of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary

22

judgment.

23

Defendant’s written response to this Order SHALL be filed on or before October 11, 2024.

24

Defendant’s written response to this Order SHALL be accompanied by a declaration under oath from

25

lead trial counsel for Defendant to explain or support any factual assertions made in response to this

26

Order to Show Cause.

27
28

The Court further ORDERS that lead trial counsel for Defendant, as well as any other counsel
responsible for defending this action, and also the official, employee, or officer of Defendant

2

1

responsible for acting as the client for this case all SHALL appear IN PERSON at a hearing regarding

2

this Order to Show Cause on October 17, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom F on the 15th Floor of the

3

San Francisco courthouse located at 450 Golden Gate Ave. in San Francisco. Remote appearances

4

will not be permitted.

5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 26, 2024
______________________________________
PETER H. KANG
United States Magistrate Judge

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
3