Deveroux v. County of Kern

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: April 28, 2023
• Docket: 1:23-cv-00239
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 ALAIN DEVEROUX and JENNIFER VALLE, Case No. 1:23-cv-00239-JLT-CDB

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED 13 v. FOR PLAINTIFFS’ FAILURE TO

PROSECUTE THIS ACTION AND TO 14 DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDERS;

ORDER CONTINUING THE MANDATORY 15 Defendants. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

16 FIVE-DAY DEADLINE 17

18 Plaintiffs filed a complaint on February 15, 2023. (ECF No. 1.) That same day, the Clerk 19 of Court issued summonses and the Court entered an Order setting a mandatory scheduling 20 conference. (ECF Nos. 3, 4.) The Order directed Plaintiff to “diligently pursue service of 21 summons and complaint” and “promptly file proofs of service.” The Order further advised 22 Plaintiffs that failure to diligently prosecute this action “may result in the imposition of 23 sanctions, including the dismissal of unserved defendants.” To date, Plaintiffs have not filed 24 proofs of service, and the defendants have not appeared in the action, requiring the Court to reset 25 the mandatory scheduling conference. 26 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 27 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 28 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 1 |! control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 2 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 3 |} 2000). 4 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within five (5) days of entry of 5 || this order, Plaintiffs SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for the 6 || failure to prosecute this action and to serve the summonses and complaint in a timely manner. 7 || Alternatively, plaintiffs may file proofs of service demonstrating the summonses and complaint 8 || have been served. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the scheduling conference previously set for May 16, 10 || 2023, is CONTINUED to July 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. 11 Plaintiffs are advised that failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause may result in 12 || dismissal of this action. 13 || IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ April 28, 2023 | hr 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28