(PS) Legardy v. Taco Bell
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FLETCHER LEGARDY, Case No. 2:23-cv-01332-DJC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN
DAYS
TACO BELL, Defendant. 16 On January 9, 2024, I screened plaintiff’s complaint and notified him that it failed to state a claim. ECF No. 3. I granted him thirty days to file an amended complaint. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.1 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; 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 harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid…