(PC) Foust v. Consumer Attorney Marketing Service
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CARL FOUST, Case No. 2:20-cv-02553-WBS-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE CONSUMER ATTORNEY MARKETING
SERVICE,
15 Defendant. 16 On March 4, 2021, I screened plaintiff’s complaint, notified plaintiff that the complaint failed to state a claim, and granted him sixty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 14. Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion for appointment of counsel. ECF No. 18. On May 3, 2021, I denied that motion and granted plaintiff until May 24, 2021 to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff has since filed two letters, neither of which could reasonably be construed as an amended complaint. To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines and requires litigants to meet those deadlines. When a plaintiff fails to comply with court-imposed deadlines, the court may dismiss the plaintiff’s case for failure to…