From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Atkins v. Adams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 18, 2012
Case No.: 1:10-cv-00755 JLT (E.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2012)

Opinion

Case No.: 1:10-cv-00755 JLT

01-18-2012

EDDIE JAMES OTIS ATKINS, Plaintiff, v. DERMAL G. ADAMS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE ACTION

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE

TO PROSECUTE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action. On August 3, 2011, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint with leave to amend. (Doc. 24) On September 6, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff's request for a 30-day extension of time to file his Third Amended Complaint. (Doc. 26) As a result, Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint was due to be filed no later than October 11, 2011. However, Plaintiff has not filed the complaint.

Therefore, no later than February 3, 2012, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause why the matter should not be dismissed based upon his failure to prosecute this action. Plaintiff's failure to respond and show good cause for his failure to prosecute this action shall result in an order dismissing this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Jennifer L. Thurston

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Atkins v. Adams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 18, 2012
Case No.: 1:10-cv-00755 JLT (E.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2012)
Case details for

Atkins v. Adams

Case Details

Full title:EDDIE JAMES OTIS ATKINS, Plaintiff, v. DERMAL G. ADAMS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 18, 2012

Citations

Case No.: 1:10-cv-00755 JLT (E.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2012)