Opinion
1:21-cv-00893-EPG (PC)
09-13-2021
JOEL OLVERA, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN KEN CLARK, et al., Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS, UP TO AND INCLUDING DISMISSAL, SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
(ECF No. 9)
Plaintiff Joel Olvera is a state inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on June 4, 2021, bringing claims concerning his treatment as an inmate classified as part of Security Threat Group Sureños following a fight that occurred on September 28, 2018, with Security Threat Group Bulldogs.” (ECF No. 1, p. 5-6). On July 29, 2021, the Court screened the complaint. (ECF No. 9). The Court found that Plaintiff stated claims against Defendants Ken Clark, D. Baughman, and J. Gallager for unconstitutional conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment and failed to state any other claims. (Id. at 16).
The Court ordered Plaintiff to, within 30 days, file a first amended complaint, notify the Court in writing that he wanted to proceed only on the claims the Court found cognizable, or notify the Court in writing that he wanted to stand on his complaint. (Id. at 17). The Court warned Plaintiff that “[f]ailure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action.” (Id. at 18). The 30-day deadline in the order has expired, and Plaintiff has not complied with the order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. Within fourteen (14) days, Plaintiff shall file a written response to this order to show cause (1) stating whether Plaintiff intends to prosecute this action and (2) explaining Plaintiffs failure to comply with the Court’s July 29, 2021 order.
2. Alternatively, the Court will discharge this show cause order, if within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff:
a. Notifies the Court in writing that he wants to proceed only on the claims against the Defendants Ken Clark, D. Baughman, and J. Gallager for unconstitutional conditions of confinement related to lack of outdoor exercise in violation of the Eighth Amendment; or
b. Files a First Amended Complaint that includes additional true factual allegations, if Plaintiff believes that additional allegations would state cognizable claim(s); or
c. Notifies the Court in writing that he wants to stand on this complaint, in which case the Court will issue findings and recommendations consistent with this order to a district judge;
3. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to respond to this order as set forth above may result in this Court issuing findings and recommendations to dismiss this case without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.