Opinion
2:24-cv-04072-PSG-AJR
07-18-2024
Paul L. Pipitone v. Deputy Matthew Barksdale, et al.
HONORABLE A. JOEL RICHLIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
DOCKET ENTRY: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)
On May 15, 2024, Plaintiff Paul L. Pipitone (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint (the “Complaint”) against the following defendants in their individual and official capacities: (1) Deputy Matthew Barksdale; (2) Deputy Nicholas Anthony; (3) Deputy Luke Rittering; (4) Deputy Bernard; (5) Deputy Chris Langston, Sergeant; (6) San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Ian Parkinson; (7) Assistant District Attorney Ashley Cervera; and (8) “John Does & Jane Roes I-V.” (Dkt. 1.) On May 23, 2024 the Court screened the Complaint and issued an order dismissing the Complaint with leave to amend (“Order”). (Dkt. 6.) In the Order, Plaintiff was directed to file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) that attempts to remedy the identified defects by June 22, 2024. (Id.)
More than three weeks have passed since Plaintiff's deadline to file a FAC in response to the Court's Order. As of today, Plaintiff has neither filed an amended complaint nor requested an extension of time in which to do so. The action cannot move forward unless and until Plaintiff files an amended complaint. Plaintiff is ordered to file a FAC, if any, by August 1, 2024 or show cause why the action should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. If Plaintiff chooses to file a FAC, it should attempt to remedy the pleading defects identified in the May 23, 2024 dismissal order (Dkt. 6.), bear the docket number assigned to this case (2:24-cv-04072-PSG-AJR), be labeled “First Amended Complaint,” and be complete in and of itself without reference to the original Complaint or any other documents (except any documents that Plaintiff chooses to attach to the FAC as exhibits). Plaintiff is encouraged to state his claims in simple language and provide only a brief statement of supporting facts, omitting facts that are not relevant. Should Plaintiff decide to file a FAC, he is strongly encouraged to utilize the form complaint attached to this Order.
Plaintiff is expressly advised that if he does not file a FAC by the Court's deadline or respond to this order, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and obey Court orders. If Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this action or certain claims or defendants, he may voluntarily dismiss the entire action, certain claims, or certain defendants by filing a Notice of Dismissal in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). A form Notice of Dismissal is attached for Plaintiff's convenience.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Attachments:
CV-09, Notice of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a) or (c). Pro Se 15, Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights (Non-Prisoner), available at https://www.uscourts.gov/forms/pro-se-forms/complaint-violation-civil-rights-non-prisoner.