Richards v. Mueller
Opinion
1 2 3 7 8 L.R.,1 Case No. 23-cv-03421-PHK
9 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND 10 v. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER 11 ROBERT MUELLER, et al., Re: Dkt. 8 12 Defendants.
13 14 On July 7, 2023, Plaintiff, who is representing himself in this action, filed an initial 15 Complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See Dkts. 1, 3. The Court 16 granted Plaintiff’s IFP application on May 13, 2024. [Dkt. 7]. The Court then proceeded to 17 undertake the mandatory screening of the Complaint required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). On 18 June 9, 2025, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 19 § 1915(e)(2)(B), as frivolous and for failure to state a claim for relief. [Dkt. 8]. The Court granted 20 Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint curing the pleading deficiencies by no later than 21 August 1, 2025. Id. 22 The August 1, 2025 deadline for filing an amended complaint has passed by more than two 23 weeks. To date, Plaintiff has neither filed an amended complaint nor requested an extension of 24 time from the Court to do so. 25
26 1 As noted by this Court in previous Orders, it appears that Plaintiff through this lawsuit may be seeking review of an adverse decision regarding social security benefits. Accordingly, as is the 27 Court’s practice in social security cases and out of an abundance of caution, the Court will refer to 1 The Court’s June 9, 2025 Order stated that “[f]ailure to file an amended complaint by the 2 deadline herein and failure to prosecute this action timely may result in negative consequences for 3 Plaintiff’s case, including recommendation for dismissal of this action with prejudice under 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.” Id. at 10. 5 The Court possesses the inherent power to dismiss an action sua sponte if a plaintiff fails 6 to prosecute their action or fails to comply with court orders. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see Link v. 7 Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962) (dismissal for failure to prosecute); Yourish v. Cal. 8 Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 1999) (dismissal for failure to comply with court orders). 9 Plaintiff was previously informed, and is warned again by this Order to Show Cause, that failure 10 to comply with this Court’s orders and failure to prosecute this case will result in negative 11 consequences for Plaintiff’s case, including the dismissal of this action. Specifically, failure to 12 respond to this Order to Show Cause and failure to file an amended complaint by the deadline will 13 be found to be a failure to comply with this Court’s orders and a failure to prosecute this lawsuit, 14 which will lead to consequences adverse to Plaintiff’s lawsuit. 15 Accordingly, the Court herein ORDERS that, by no later than September 18, 2025, 16 Plaintiff SHALL EITHER (1) file an amended complaint which addresses and cures the 17 deficiencies noted by the Court’s June 9, 2025 Order, OR (2) file a written response to this Order 18 to Show Cause explaining why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute this 19 case or for failure to comply with this Court’s directives and orders. To be clear, if Plaintiff files 20 (by September 18, 2025) an amended complaint curing the deficiencies noted in the June 9, 2025 21 Order, such a filing will be deemed to be a response to this Order to Show Cause and no other 22 written response would be necessary. 23 If Plaintiff needs additional time to prepare and file an amended complaint, Plaintiff shall 24 explain why and how much additional time is needed in any written response filed by the 25 September 18, 2025 deadline. 26 If Plaintiff fails to respond to this Order to Show Cause by the September 18, 2025 27 deadline set herein, the Court will reassign this action to a District Judge with a recommendation ] The Clerk is directed to mail this Order to Show Cause to Plaintiff at their address of 2 record. 4 || Dated: August 18, 2025 5 PETER H. KANG 6 United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 11 a 12
& 13 14
15 16
© 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
Richards v. Mueller (Richards v. Mueller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.