Lau

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AMOS GAON, Case No. 1:20-cv-00182-JLT (PC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

13 v. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE

COURT’S ORDER

14 T. LAU, et al., 21-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 On August 27, 2020, the Court issued a screening order directing Plaintiff, within 21 days, 17 to file a second amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading. (Doc. 10.) Although 18 more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or 19 otherwise respond to the Court’s order. 20 The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide, 21 “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with … any order of the Court may be grounds for 22 the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court.” 23 Local Rule 110. “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets” and, in exercising 24 that power, may impose…