Residents

(PS) Littleton v. Residents

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 30, 20242:23-cv-00735California375 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 MICHAEL LITTLETON, Case No. 2:23-cv-00735-KJM-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 v. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN

DAYS

14 RESIDENTS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 15, 2024, I screened plaintiff’s complaint and notified him that it failed to state 18 a claim. ECF No. 4. I granted him thirty days to file an amended complaint and notified him that 19 failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. To date, plaintiff 20 has not filed an amended complaint. 21 To manage its docket effectively, the court imposes deadlines on litigants and requires 22 litigants to meet those deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, 23 for failure to comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; 24 Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. 25 King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary…

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.