Gaines v. State of California

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 RONISHA SHARDE GAINES, Case No. 24-cv-01280-TSH 6 Plaintiff, 7 y. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 9 Defendant.

10 Plaintiff Ronisha Sharde Gaines initiated this lawsuit by filing a complaint (ECF No. 1) 11 and application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2). On March 15, 2024, the Court granted || Plaintiffs in forma pauperis application but found the complaint deficient under 28 U.S.C. § 13 1915(e). ECF No. 5. The Court directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the || deficiencies identified in the screening order by April 12, 2024. The Court warned that if Plaintiff || failed to cure the deficiencies, the case would be reassigned to a district judge with a || recommendation for dismissal. Plaintiff has failed to respond.

3 17 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte “to achieve the || orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-33 || (1962). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff Ronisha Sharde Gaines to show cause why || this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court || deadlines. Plaintiff shall file a declaration by May 3, 2024. Notice is hereby provided that failure || file a written response will be deemed an admission that you do not intend to prosecute, and this || case will likely be dismissed. Thus, it is imperative the Court receive a written response by the || deadline above.

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated: April 19, 2024 27 [AA Lj, — THOMAS S. HIXSON 28 United States Magistrate Judge