Davis v. City of San Francisco

Filing 7

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Show Cause Response due by 1/19/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on January 10, 2018. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/10/2018) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/10/2018: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (igS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JIMMY LEE DAVIS, Case No. 17-cv-06387-DMR Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 10 CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Re: Dkt. No. 6 12 On November 1, 2017, Plaintiff Jimmy Lee Davis filed suit in this Court along with an 13 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1, 2]. On December 15, 2017, the 14 court granted the IFP application and dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend. [Docket No. 15 6]. Mr. Davis was ordered to file an amended complaint by January 4, 2018. Id. No amended 16 complaint has been filed. 17 Accordingly, the court ORDERS Mr. Davis to respond by January 19, 2018 and explain 18 in writing (1) why he failed to file an amended complaint and (2) why the case should not be 19 dismissed for failure to prosecute. Failure to respond by January 19, 2018 may result in dismissal 20 of this action. 28 R NIA onn Judge D ER H 27 RT 26 ______________________________________ Donna M. Ryu United States Magistrateyu a M. R Judge NO 25 DERED O OR IT IS S FO 24 Dated: January 10, 2018 LI 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. A 22 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O S 21 UNIT ED United States District Court Northern District of California 11 N F D IS T IC T O R C

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?