(PC) Davis v. State of California

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 27, 2020
• Docket: 1:18-cv-00832
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEROME MARKIEL DAVIS, Case No. 1:18-cv-00832-DAD-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 13 v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., (ECF No. 40) 15 Defendants. TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE 16

17 Plaintiff Jerome Markiel Davis (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds 19 against Defendant Roberts in her individual capacity for deliberate indifference in violation of the 20 Eighth Amendment, arising from the alleged incident of food tampering. 21 On June 22, 2020, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 40.) In the 22 motion, Plaintiff was provided with notice of the requirements for opposing a motion for 23 summary judgment. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 24 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1988); Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411–12 (9th Cir. 1988). (ECF 25 No. 40-1.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff’s 26 opposition or statement of no opposition was therefore due on or before July 16, 2020. The 27 deadline for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment has expired, and 28 1 he has not otherwise been in contact with the Court. Plaintiff will be permitted one final 2 opportunity to show cause why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice. 3 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause by WRITTEN 4 RESPONSE within twenty-one (21) days of service of this order why this action should not be 5 dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff may comply with the Court’s order 6 by filing an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s June 22, 2020, motion for 7 summary judgment. Plaintiff is warned that if he fails to comply with the Court’s order, this 8 matter will be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10

11 Dated: July 27, 2020 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28