Pimentel v. County of Sonoma et al

Filing 50

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 8/17/11. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 OAKLAND DIVISION 5 6 DAVID W. PIMENTEL, Plaintiff, 7 8 Case No: C 08-2121 SBA ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE vs. 9 COUNTY OF SONOMA, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Plaintiff failed to appear for a telephonic Case Management Conference set for 13 October 8, 2008. Dkt. 34. On October 14, 2008, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause 14 as to why the case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Id. The Court set a hearing for November 12, 2008, during 16 which Plaintiff informed the Court that he was unable to appear as a result with an 17 emergency involving his grandmother. Dkt. 36. The Court vacated its Order to Show 18 Cause. Id. On February 25, 2009, a telephonic Case Management Conference was 19 schedule and Plaintiff again failed to appear. Dkt. 46. The case was continued to April 1, 20 2009 for an Order to Show Cause as to why the case should not be dismissed for failure to 21 prosecute. Id. Although the Order to Show Cause hearing was not held, Plaintiff has made 22 no contact with the Court or otherwise prosecuted this action since he filed his last case 23 management statement on February 18, 2009. Dkt. 44. Accordingly, 24 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff shall show cause in writing why the 25 instant action should not be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for 26 failure to prosecute. Within ten (10) days of the date this order is filed, Plaintiff shall file a 27 memorandum explaining why the action should not be dismissed. The memorandum, 28 which shall be entitled, “Response to Order to Show Cause,” shall set forth the nature of the 1 cause, its present status, the reason it has not been brought to trial or otherwise terminated, 2 any basis for opposing dismissal and its expected course if not dismissed. FAILURE TO 3 FULLY COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER WILL BE DEEMED SUFFICIENT GROUNDS 4 TO DISMISS THE ACTION, WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 Dated: August 17, 2011 _____________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 PIMENTEL et al, 4 Plaintiff, 5 v. 6 COUNTY OF SONOMA et al, 7 Defendant. / 8 9 Case Number: CV08-02121 SBA 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 11 12 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. 13 14 15 That on August 17, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 18 19 David W. Pimentel 1192 Liberty Road Petaluma, CA 94952 20 Dated: August 17, 2011 21 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk 22 By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?