From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garcia v. Garcia

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 21, 2021
1:17-cv-01313-BAM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)

Opinion

1:17-cv-01313-BAM (PC)

07-21-2021

MARCO A. GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. GARCIA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE (ECF No. 48)

BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Plaintiff Marco A. Garcia (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants Garcia and Bursiaga for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. All parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 28.) This matter is set for a telephonic trial confirmation hearing on September 1, 2021, and a jury trial on November 1, 2021.

On May 18, 2021, the Court issued a second scheduling order directing Plaintiff to file his pretrial statement, any motion for attendance of incarcerated witnesses, and the names and locations of any unincarcerated witnesses who refuse to testify voluntarily on or before July 7, 2021. (ECF No. 48.) Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the procedures set forth in that order may result in the preclusion of any and all witnesses. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff was also advised that the failure to file a pretrial statement as required by that order may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions, which may include dismissal of the action or entry of default. (Id. at 4.) The deadline for Plaintiff's pretrial statement, motion for attendance of incarcerated witnesses, and names and locations of unincarcerated witnesses has expired, and Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court's scheduling order or to otherwise communicate with the Court.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to show cause by written response why this action should not be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey the Court's order and for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff's response is due within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this order. If Plaintiff fails to file a response, or the response does not demonstrate good cause, this matter will be dismissed .

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Garcia v. Garcia

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 21, 2021
1:17-cv-01313-BAM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)
Case details for

Garcia v. Garcia

Case Details

Full title:MARCO A. GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. GARCIA, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 21, 2021

Citations

1:17-cv-01313-BAM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)