1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN JOSE DIVISION 4 5 SCOTT JOHNSON, Case No. 5:21-cv-03006-EJD 6 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE 7 Vv. DISMISSED 8 ZIEGLER-HOFFMAN PROPERTIES, et al., ? Defendants. 10 Plaintiff Scott Johnson filed the present action on April 26, 2021. Dkt. No. 1. Pursuant to General Order 56, the parties’ last day to conduct a joint site inspection was June 25, 2021 and 12 Plaintiff's last day to file a notice of need for mediation was October 6, 2021. Dkt. No. 12.

© = 13 Plaintiff did not file a notice of need for mediation, nor did Plaintiff seek relief from the October 6, 4 2021 aeadli eadline.

15 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the

a 16 orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

(1962). Plaintiff is directed to file a written response to this order by November 29, 2021 and to

a 18 appear before the Court on December 9, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. and show cause why this action 19 should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 20 Procedure 41(b). If Plaintiff fails to file a written response by the above deadline, the Court will 71 dismiss the action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: November 16, 2021 24 * eo 26 EDWARD J. DAVILA United States District Judge 27 28 || Case No.: 5:21-cv-03006-EJD OSC WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED