(PS) King v. CA Dept. of Water Resources
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELISE KING, Case No. 2:17-cv-01257-JDP Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS WATER RESOURCES, et al., ORDER VACATING THE DECEMBER 10, Defendants. 2020 MOTION HEARING
17 On November 6, 2020, defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and 18 noticed the motion for hearing. ECF No. 33. Plaintiff has not responded, and the deadline to do 19 so has now passed. Accordingly, the court will order plaintiff to show cause why this case should 20 not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court will also grant plaintiff another opportunity to 21 respond to the pending motion and vacate the hearing. 22 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires 23 litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute…