Fernandez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HANK RICHARD CORONEL, Case No. 2:23-cv-02793-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE R. FERNANDEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 On March 14, 2024, I screened plaintiff’s complaint and notified him that it did not state a cognizable claim. ECF No. 6. I granted him thirty days to file either an amended complaint or an advisement indicating his intent to stand by his current one, subject to a recommendation that it be dismissed. To date, plaintiff has done neither. 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…