Jannings v. PG&E Corporation

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 JANNINGS, Case No. 23-cv-01735-HSG 8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 Vv. Re: Dkt. No. 13 11 Defendant. 12 On August 24, 2023, pro se Appellant Spiro Jannings filed a Motion for Expansion of 13 } Time. Dkt. No. 11. The Court granted the motion and Appellant’s principal brief was due 14 September 5, 2023. Dkt. No. 13. Plaintiff failed to file his brief. 3 15 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides that where a “plaintiff fails to prosecute or 16 to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any 3 17 || claim against it.” But a defendant need not file a motion in order for a district court to dismiss a 18 } case under Rule 41(b), given the Supreme Court’s statement that “[t]he authority of a court to 19 dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been considered an ‘inherent power,’ 20 governed not by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own 21 affairs[.]” See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962). 22 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered TO SHOW CAUSE why the case should not be dismissed 23 for failure to prosecute, given Plaintiffs failure to file his opening brief by the extended 24 September 5, 2023, deadline. Plaintiff shall file a statement of two pages or less by September 18, 25 2023. 27 || Dated: 9/11/2023 Abepwel 5 Mb |p HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 28 United States District Judge