Campell
(PC) Harris v. Campell
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARVIN HARRIS, Case No.: 1:18-cv-01659-DAD-JLT (PC)
Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CASE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
v. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
COURT’S ORDER
T.L. CAMPBELL, et al., 21-DAY DEADLINE Defendants.
16 On November 20, 2019, the Court issued a screening order finding that Plaintiff failed to state cognizable claims in his first amended complaint and granting him leave to file a second amended complaint. (Doc. 8.) Although more than a month has passed, Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or to otherwise respond to the Court’s order. The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide, “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with … any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets”…