Ulit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRISTOPHER CASTILLO, Case No. 1:20-cv-01458-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

v. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE

COURT’S ORDER

WAYNE ULIT, et al., 21-DAY DEADLINE Defendants.

16 On December 2, 2021, the Court issued a screening order directing Plaintiff to file a third amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading or a notice of voluntary dismissal within 21 days. (Doc. 19.) Although more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the screening order. The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide that “[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” and, in exercising that…