(PC) Adair v. Nakken

E.D. California

(PC) Adair v. Nakken

DecidedMarch 13, 2025

Docket2:24-cv-00578

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC) Adair v. Nakken ((PC) Adair v. Nakken) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC) Adair v. Nakken, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES FRANKLIN ADAIR, Case No. 2:24-cv-0578 (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 JOSHUA NAKKEN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On November 13, 2024, I screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint and notified him 18 that all the claims could not proceed together. ECF No. 12. I ordered him to file, within thirty 19 days, an amended complaint or a notice to proceed with certain claims. Id. To date, plaintiff has 20 not filed any response. 21 The court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that 22 power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal. Bautista v. Los Angeles Cnty., 23 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); see Local Rule 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to 24 comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the 25 Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.”). A court may dismiss 26 an action based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action, failure to obey a court order, or failure 27 to comply with local rules. See Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) 28 (dismissal for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with local rules). 1 I will give plaintiff a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for his 2 | failure to file an amended complaint or advisement of his intent to proceed with certain claims. 3 | Plaintiff's failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and 4 | will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to 5 | show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute 6 | and failure to comply with court orders. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he 7 | shall file, within twenty-one days, an amended complaint or notice of intent to proceed with 8 || certain claims. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. ll ( ie - Dated: _ March 12, 2025 q——— 12 JEREMY D. PETERSON B UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES FRANKLIN ADAIR, Case No. 2:24-cv-0578 (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 JOSHUA NAKKEN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On November 13, 2024, I screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint and notified him 18 that all the claims could not proceed together. ECF No. 12. I ordered him to file, within thirty 19 days, an amended complaint or a notice to proceed with certain claims. Id. To date, plaintiff has 20 not filed any response. 21 The court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that 22 power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal. Bautista v. Los Angeles Cnty., 23 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); see Local Rule 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to 24 comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the 25 Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.”). A court may dismiss 26 an action based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action, failure to obey a court order, or failure 27 to comply with local rules. See Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) 28 (dismissal for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with local rules). 1 I will give plaintiff a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for his 2 | failure to file an amended complaint or advisement of his intent to proceed with certain claims. 3 | Plaintiff's failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and 4 | will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to 5 | show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute 6 | and failure to comply with court orders. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he 7 | shall file, within twenty-one days, an amended complaint or notice of intent to proceed with 8 || certain claims. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. ll ( ie - Dated: _ March 12, 2025 q——— 12 JEREMY D. PETERSON B UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC) Adair v. Nakken, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pc-adair-v-nakken-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack