Jonathan Hall v. State of California

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JONATHAN HALL, Case No. 2:25-cv-2863-DC-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On October 10, 2025, I ordered plaintiff to submit, within thirty days, either the $405 18 filing fee or an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 3. To date, plaintiff 19 has not complied with that order. 20 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires 21 litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute 22 or failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Hells Canyon Pres. 23 Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 24 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to 25 administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. 26 …