Yap

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID HANDFORD, Case No. 2:21-cv-00115-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE

TO STATE A CLAIM

V. YAP,

RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE

Defendant. DAYS 16 17 On March 9, 2021, I screened plaintiff’s complaint, notified him that the complaint failed to state a claim, and granted him sixty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 5. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires litigants to meet those deadlines. The court can dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or failure to comply with court orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a…