(PS) Amiri v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Opinion

SAFAR AMIRI, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-01938-KJM-JDP (PS) Plaintiffs, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., Defendants.

On January 25, 2024, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint. ECF No. 11. To date, plaintiffs have not filed a response to the motion. Under the court’s local rules, a responding party is required to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to a motion no later than fourteen days after the date it was filed. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. The court will give plaintiffs the opportunity to explain why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. Plaintiffs’ failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The March 14, 2024 hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss is continued to April 11, 2024, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 9. 2. By no later than March 21, 2024, plaintiffs shall file an opposition or statement of non- opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss. See ECF No. 11. 3. Plaintiffs shall show cause, by no later than March 21, 2024, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion. 4. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiffs’ opposition, if any, no later than April 4, 2024. 5. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to comply with local rules. ( q oy — Dated: _ March 4, 2024 q_—— JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE