(PC) Thompson v. Garcia-Fernandez

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TOMMY LEE THOMPSON, Case No. 1:22-cv-01208-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 13 v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE GARCIA-FERNANDEZ, et al., (ECF No. 44) 15 Defendants. TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE 17 Plaintiff Tommy Lee Thompson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants E. Garcia-Fernandez, Bravo, Guerro, C. Castillo, and Gonzales (“Defendants”) for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. All parties have consented to United States Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF Nos. 38, 41.)

22 On December 22, 2023, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. (ECF No. 44.) Together with the motion, Plaintiff was provided with notice of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 26 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1988); Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411–12 (9th Cir. 1988). (ECF No. 44-1.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff’s opposition or statement of non-opposition was due on or before January 15, 2024. The deadline for Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment has expired, and he has not otherwise been in contact with the Court. Plaintiff will be permitted one final opportunity to show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice.

4 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause by WRITTEN RESPONSE within twenty-one (21) days of service of this order why this action should not be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff may comply with the Court’s order by filing an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ December 22, 2023 motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff is warned that if he fails to comply with the Court’s order, this matter will be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 Dated: January 29, 2024 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE