From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Murillo v. Dist. Attorney Office

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 11, 2023
2:22-cv-01920-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-01920-JDP (PC)

09-11-2023

CIXTO CRUZ MURILLO, Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE, et al., Defendant.


ORDER

JEREMY D. PETERSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On July 13, 2023, I screened plaintiff's amended complaint and notified him that his complaint did not state cognizable claims. ECF No. 21. I granted him thirty days to file an amended complaint or an advisement indicating his intent to stand by his current complaint, subject to a recommendation of dismissal. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Plaintiff has, however, filed a response to the July 13 order, which states in part, “go ahead dismiss [the complaint.]” ECF No. 23 at 1.

If plaintiff does not want to pursue this action, he can voluntarily dismiss it without prejudice by filing a notice of dismissal in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A).

To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain 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 the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed.R.Civ.P. 1.

Plaintiff will be given a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case for his failure to file an amended complaint or advisement of his intent to stand by his current complaint, subject to dismissal. Plaintiff's failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to show cause within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he shall file, within twenty-one days, an amended complaint or advisement of his intent to stand by his current complaint, subject to dismissal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Murillo v. Dist. Attorney Office

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 11, 2023
2:22-cv-01920-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)
Case details for

Murillo v. Dist. Attorney Office

Case Details

Full title:CIXTO CRUZ MURILLO, Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 11, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-01920-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)