USPS

(PS) James v. USPS

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 30, 20242:24-cv-00880California475 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 LATACHIANNA JAMES, Case No. 2:24-cv-00880-DAD-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 On March 25, 2024, defendant United States filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s 19 complaint. ECF No. 5. To date, plaintiff has not filed a response to the motion. 20 Under the court’s local rules, a responding party is required to file an opposition or 21 statement of non-opposition to a motion no later than fourteen days after the date it was filed. 22 E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet 23 certain deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to 24 comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon 25 Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 26 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh…

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.