(PS) Whitsitt v. Grubb

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WILLIAM J. WHITSITT, No. 2:23-cv-0869-TLN-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTY GRUBB; SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; DAVES TOWING; RONNIE ESTRADA; and DOES 1-100, 17 Defendants.

19 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter, which was accordingly referred to the undersigned for pretrial matters pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff filed the complaint in this matter on May 10, 2023, a First Amended Complaint on March 11, 2024, and a Second Amended Complaint on September 6, 2024. ECF Nos. 1, 9, 22.

23 On December 13, 2024, the Court issued an order setting a pretrial scheduling conference for January 23, 2025. ECF No. 26. The Court’s order also required the parties to file status reports at least 14 days prior to the pretrial scheduling conference. Id. While Defendants filed a timely status report in advance of the pretrial scheduling conference, Plaintiff did not.

27 Plaintiff was not present at the in-person pretrial scheduling conference on January 23, 2025. See ECF No. 30. Counsel for Defendants stated that he had not had any contact with | Plaintiff leading up to the pretrial scheduling conference.

2 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows for the dismissal of an action if a plaintiff || fails to prosecute that action or comply with a court order. Moreover, Local Rule 110 provides | for the imposition of “any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent || power of the Court,” for a party’s failure to comply with “any order of the Court[.]” Courts || regularly dismiss actions where the plaintiff fails to participate in scheduling conferences or || otherwise fails to prosecute the case. See, e.g., Moore v. Walmart Inc., Case No. 23-cv-02293- | TLT, 2024 WL 2125610 (N.D. Cal. May 10, 2024).

9 Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order that he file a status report in advance of | the pretrial scheduling conference and failed to attend the pretrial scheduling conference. While | Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he must still comply with the Court’s orders and applicable rules | and must participate in the prosecution of this case. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED || that: 14 Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why | this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and for failure to follow an order of the | Court;! and 17 Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in a || recommendation that this case be dismissed.

19 | DATED: January 24, 2025 21 ) 22 SEAN C. RIORDAN 33 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE || | Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action, plaintiff may comply with this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules || of Civil Procedure.