Bryon Baldwin v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., et al.

E.D. California

Bryon Baldwin v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., et al.

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 28, 2026·No. 2:24-cv-03401·Unknown

Opinion

BRYON BALDWIN, Case No. 2:24-cv-3401-DC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FIFTH THIRD BANK, N.A., et al., Defendants. On December 18, 2025, defendants Fifth Third Bank, N.A. and Fifth Third Bancorp filed a motion to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 43. To date, plaintiff has not responded to defendants’ motion. 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. 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 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. ] 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 defendants’ motion. Plaintiffs failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in dismissal of this action. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The January 29, 2026 hearing on defendants’ motion is continued to February 26, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. 2. By no later than February 11, 2026, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. 3. Plaintiff shall show cause, by no later than February 11, 2026, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. 4. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, no later than February 19, 2026.

Dated: _ January 28, 2026 Q_——_ JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BRYON BALDWIN, Case No. 2:24-cv-3401-DC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FIFTH THIRD BANK, N.A., et al., Defendants. On December 18, 2025, defendants Fifth Third Bank, N.A. and Fifth Third Bancorp filed a motion to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 43. To date, plaintiff has not responded to defendants’ motion. 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. 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 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. ] 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 defendants’ motion. Plaintiffs failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in dismissal of this action. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The January 29, 2026 hearing on defendants’ motion is continued to February 26, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. 2. By no later than February 11, 2026, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. 3. Plaintiff shall show cause, by no later than February 11, 2026, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. 4. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, no later than February 19, 2026.

Dated: _ January 28, 2026 Q_——_ JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Bryon Baldwin v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., et al., (E.D. Cal. 2026).

Pincite

Bryon Baldwin v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., et al. (Bryon Baldwin v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related