Garcia v. Peninsula Company

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ORLANDO GARCIA, Case No. 22-cv-00192-JST 8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 10 PENINSULA COMPANY, et al., Defendants.

13 Plaintiff Orlando Garcia filed the complaint in this case on January 11, 2022. ECF No. 1.

14 Under General Order 56, Gomez was required to complete service, or file a motion for administrative relief requesting an extension, within 60 days of filing the complaint. General Order No. 56 ¶ 1. That deadline passed on March 14, 2022. To date, no proof of service or administrative motion has been filed.

18 Garcia is ordered to show cause as to why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to comply with the Court’s orders. See Civil L.R. 1-4; Wang v. Nev. Sys. of Higher Educ., No. 3:18- cv-00075-MMD-CLB, 2022 WL 95428, at *4 (D. Nev. Jan. 10, 2022) (“Federal courts have the inherent power to punish conduct which abuses the judicial process, including accessing attorneys’ fees when a party has ‘acted in bad faith, vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons.’”

23 (quoting Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 45-46 (1991)). The Court notes that it has frequently been required to address Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to comply with the Court’s deadlines. See Johnson v. Silvercreek Yuba I, LLC, Case No. 21-cv-05907; Johnson v. Gamba, Case No. 21-cv-06708; Whitaker v. Sugarman, Case No. 4:21-cv-07308; Johnson v. T&V Investment, Inc., Case No. 21-cv-09162.

1 A written show cause response is due by May 24, 2022. The Court will conduct a show cause hearing on June 7, 2022, at 2:00 p.m.

3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

4 || Dated: April 18, 2022 .

JON S. TIGAR 6 nited States District Midge

© = 17 Z 18