Lordell Jones v. Jeffrey Haga

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 18-2574 AB (SS) Date: December 10, 2019 Page 1 of 2

Title: Lordell Jones v. Jeffrey Haga, et al.

DOCKET ENTRY: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT DEFENDANTS DR. HAGA IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND THE COUNTY BE DISMISSED FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO PROVIDE COMPLETED USM-285 FORMS

PRESENT:

HONORABLE SUZANNE H. SEGAL, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

_Marlene Ramirez_ _______None_______ __None__ Deputy Clerk Court Reporter/Recorder Tape No.

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)

On October 23, 2019, the Court authorized service of the complaint in the above- referenced pro se state prisoner civil rights action. (Dkt. No. 17). The Court directed the United States Marshals Service to effect service on Dr. Jeffrey Haga in both his individual and official capacities, and on the County of San Bernardino, upon Plaintiff’s submission of completed USM-285 forms for each of those Defendants. (Dkt. No. 19). The Court explained to Plaintiff that he must fill out a separate form for each Defendant and identify the capacity (individual or official) for the claims against each Defendant. (See Dkt. No. 18, Order re Service of Process, at 2).

Accordingly, Plaintiff was required to complete separate USM-285 forms for Dr. Haga and one for the County. However, on December 9, 2019, the Court received Plaintiff’s Notice of Submission, which attached a completed USM-285 form only for Dr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. EDCV 18-2574 AB (SS) Date: December 10, 2019 Page 2 of 2

Haga. The Marshals Service cannot effect on the County without a completed USM-285 form for the County.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, why the Magistrate Judge should not recommend that Plaintiff’s claims against the County be dismissed for failure to prosecute and obey court orders pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff may discharge this Order by filing either: (1) a separate completed USM-285 form for the County of San Bernardino; (2) or a Notice of Dismissal dismissing Plaintiff’s claims against the County; or (3) a declaration under penalty of perjury stating why he is unable to comply with options 1 or 2.

Plaintiff is expressly warned that the failure to timely file one of the three categories of documents listed above by the Court’s deadline will result in a recommendation that Plaintiff’s claims against the County of San Bernardino be dismissed for failure to prosecute and obey court orders pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884, 891 (9th Cir. 2019) (“‘The failure of the plaintiff eventually to respond to the court’s ultimatum . . . is properly met with the sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal.’”) (emphasis omitted; quoting Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1065 (9th Cir. 2004)).

Alternatively, if Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue his claims, he may request a voluntary dismissal of his claims against those two Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). A Notice of Dismissal form is attached for Plaintiff’s convenience.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff at his address of record along with a blank USM-285 form. IT IS SO ORDERED.

MINUTES FORM 00:00 CIVIL-GEN Initials of Deputy Clerk mr