Lundy

Vincent J. Jones v. Leanna Lundy

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 10, 20252:25-cv-01559California863 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VINCENT J. JONES, Case No. 2:25-cv-1559-JDP (P)

Petitioner,

ORDER; FINDINGS AND

v. RECOMMENDATIONS LEANNA LUNDY, Respondent. 16 On July 21, 2025, I ordered petitioner to submit either a completed in forma pauperis application or pay the required filing fee within thirty days. ECF No. 3. Petitioner failed to comply with that order, therefore, on September 9, 2025, I ordered petitioner to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to pay the filing fee, to prosecute, and to comply with court orders. ECF No. 5. Petitioner has not responded to the order to show cause, and the time to do so has passed. Accordingly, dismissal of the action is warranted. 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…

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.