(PC) Kanongataa v. Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRAME KALI KANONGATAA, Case No. 2:20-cv-01116-JAM-JDP (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE

TO STATE A CLAIM SCOTT JONES, et al.

RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE

Defendants. DAYS

On January 4, 2021, the court screened plaintiff’s second amended complaint and notified plaintiff that it failed to state a claim. ECF No. 18. Plaintiff was granted sixty days to file an amended complaint. Id. To date, plaintiff has not filed a third amended complaint.

To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.

Plaintiff will be given a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for his failure to file an amended complaint. Plaintiffs failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he shall file, within twenty-one days, a third amended complaint. g IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ April 22, 2021

JEREMY D. PETERSON i UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE