Mroczek

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RAMON L. ESPINOZA, Case No. 2:23-cv-00228-TLN-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN

DAYS

RICK MROCZECK, et al., Defendants. 16 On February 20, 2024, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint and ordered him to file an amended complaint within thirty days. ECF No. 22. 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 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 needless burden for…