(PS) Ahmad v. Newsom
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NOMAN AHMAD, Case No. 2:23-cv-01378-DAD-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 v. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, LLC, et al.,
15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 29, 2024, the court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss the first amended 18 complaint and ordered plaintiff to file, within thirty days, either a second amended complaint or a 19 notice stating his intent to not file a second amended complaint. ECF No. 41. To date, plaintiff 20 has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 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 not file an amended complaint. 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 fourteen days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute 6 | and failure to state a claim. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he shall file, 7 | within fourteen days, an amended complaint. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 ( 1 ow — Dated: _ October 16, 2024 Q_—_—. 11 JEREMY D. PETERSON 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13 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
(PS) Ahmad v. Newsom ((PS) Ahmad v. Newsom) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.