Jose Joaquin Lopez v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL Case No. 2:19-cv-02302-AB-KES Date: January 15, 2020 Title: JOSE JOAQUIN LOPEZ v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPT, et al.

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE KAREN E. SCOTT, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Jazmin Dorado Not Present Courtroom Clerk Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANTS: None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): Order to Show Cause Why this Action Should Not Be Dismissed In March 2019, Jose Joaquin Lopez (“Plaintiff”) filed a civil rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (“LACSD”) and St. Francis Medical Center. (Dkt. 1.) When Plaintiff filed the Complaint, he was a prisoner in the custody of the state of California. The Complaint alleged that four unnamed LACSD deputies violated his Eighth Amendment rights by using excessive force in his arrest and showing deliberate indifference to his medical needs.

In June 2019, the Court screened the Complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act dismissed it with leave to amend. (Dkt. 10.) The Court found that the Complaint did not allege that the officers acted pursuant to an official policy or custom, as is necessary to hold the LACSD liable for the officers’ actions under Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978). (Dkt. 10 at 3-4.) The Court also found that the Complaint failed to allege any facts against the hospital, and the Court was unable to infer what Plaintiff contended that the hospital did or did not do that entitled him to relief. (Id. at 4-5.) The Court gave Plaintiff until July 25, 2019 to file a First Amended Complaint. (Id. at 5.)

In July and December 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff two extensions of this deadline. (Dkt. 12, 14.) In or around November 2019, Plaintiff was released from custody. (See Dkt. 13.)

In his second request for an extension of time, Plaintiff indicated that he had hired an attorney who needed additional time to review the case. (Id.) CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL Case No. 2:19-cv-02302-AB-KES Date: January 15, 2020 Page 2 Plaintiff’s latest deadline for filing a First Amended Complaint passed on December 27, 2019, and as of the date of this Order, the Court has not received any further filings from Plaintiff.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, on or before February 14, 2020, Plaintiff shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or failure to follow this Court’s orders.

Plaintiff may discharge this Order to Show Cause by either: (a) filing a First Amended Complaint that attempts to remedy the defects identified in the Court’s screening order; (b) explaining why he missed the most recent deadline to do so and demonstrating good cause for a third extension of the deadline; or (c) voluntarily dismissing this action.

If Plaintiff fails to respond to this Order to Show Cause, the Court may dismiss this action for lack of prosecution and/or failure to follow the Court’s orders.

Initials of Deputy Clerk JD