Elmallah

(PS) Sermeno v. Elmallah

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 24, 20252:23-cv-02808California392 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LARRY ALTAMIRANO SERMENO, Case No. 2:23-cv-2808-DAD-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE SHARIF ELMALLAH, Defendant. 16 On February 28, 2025, I screened plaintiff’s complaint and dismissed it for failure to state a claim. ECF 3. I ordered plaintiff to file, within thirty days, either an amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action. Id. To date, plaintiff has not complied with that order. The court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal. Bautista v. Los Angeles Cnty., 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); see Local Rule 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.”). A court may dismiss an action based on a party’s failure to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.