From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burgess v. Newsom

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 30, 2021
1:21-cv-00077-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2021)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00077-SAB (PC)

06-30-2021

JEFFREY ALAN BURGESS, Plaintiff, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER, FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, AND FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF (ECF NO. 8)

Jeffrey Alan Burgess (“Plaintiff'), a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Plaintiff filed the instant action on January 20, 2021.

On February 19, 2021, the Court issued an order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust the administrative remedies

Plaintiff filed a response on March 22, 2021.

On May 20, 2021, the Court vacated the order to show cause, screened Plaintiff's complaint finding no cognizable claims, and granted Plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint.

To date, Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise communicate with the Court. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall show cause in writing why the action should not be dismissed. Local Rule 110. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a cognizable claim for relief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Burgess v. Newsom

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 30, 2021
1:21-cv-00077-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2021)
Case details for

Burgess v. Newsom

Case Details

Full title:JEFFREY ALAN BURGESS, Plaintiff, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 30, 2021

Citations

1:21-cv-00077-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2021)