(PS) Zamora v. Propak Logistics, LLC

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRANCISCO J. ZAMORA, Case No. 2:23-cv-2534-DJC-JDP 12 Plaintiff, 13 v.d ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE PROPAK LOGISTICS, LLC, 15 Defendant.

17 On July 11, 2025, defendant filed a motion to dismiss this case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. ECF No. 34. To date, plaintiff has not responded to defendant’s motion.

19 Under the court’s local rules, a responding party is required to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to a motion no later than fourteen days after the date it was filed.

21 E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 25 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.

1 The court will give plaintiff the opportunity to explain why sanctions should not be | imposed for failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion.

3 | Plaintiff's failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and | will result in dismissal of this action.

5 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 6 1. The August 21, 2025 hearing on defendant’s motion is continued to September 25, | 2025, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 9.

8 2. By no later than September 4, 2025, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of | non-opposition to defendant’s motion.

10 3. Plaintiff shall show cause, by no later than September 4, 2025, why sanctions should | not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to | defendant’s motion.

13 4. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiffs opposition, if any, no later than September 18, | 2025.

16 IT IS SO ORDERED.

17 ( 1 Sy — Dated: _ August 18, 2025 q——— 18 JEREMY D. PETERSON 19 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE