Phillips

(HC) Wilson v. Phillips

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 18, 20242:23-cv-01986California371 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEVEN OMAR LARRY WILSON, Case No. 2:23-cv-01986-TLN-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER 13 v. TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PETITIONER’S

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

14 BRYAN D. PHILLIPS, ECF No. 10 15 Respondent.

RESPONSE DUE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE

16 DAYS 17 18 On January 11, 2024, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. ECF No. 10. To date, 19 petitioner has not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition. 20 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines and requires litigants to 21 meet those deadlines. The court may dismiss a case for petitioner’s failure to prosecute or failure 22 to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. 23 U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he consensus among our sister circuits, 24 with which we agree, is that courts may dismiss under Rule 41(b) sua sponte, at least under 25 certain circumstances.”). Involuntary dismissal is a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.