Filed: May 31, 2018
Latest Update: May 31, 2018
Summary: ORDER DEBORAH BARNES , Magistrate Judge . By order signed February 6, 2018, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. 1 (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court's order in a timely manner could result in this action being dismissed. On March 30, 2018,
Summary: ORDER DEBORAH BARNES , Magistrate Judge . By order signed February 6, 2018, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. 1 (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court's order in a timely manner could result in this action being dismissed. On March 30, 2018, p..
More
ORDER
DEBORAH BARNES, Magistrate Judge.
By order signed February 6, 2018, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order.1 (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court's order in a timely manner could result in this action being dismissed. On March 30, 2018, plaintiff's request for a twenty-eight day extension of time to file an amended complaint was granted. (ECF No. 28.) Again plaintiff was cautioned that the failure to timely comply with that order could result in the dismissal of this action.
On May 11, 2018, after the twenty-eight day period had expired and plaintiff had not responded to the court's order in any manner, the court issued plaintiff an order to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed due to a lack of prosecution. (ECF No. 29.) On May 24, 2018, plaintiff filed a response. (ECF No. 30.) Therein, plaintiff asserts, in part, that he was incarcerated for some period of time which delayed his ability to comply with the court's orders.2 (Id. at 1.)
Every plaintiff in federal court has a responsibility to prosecute his action diligently. Failure to do so may permit the district court to dismiss. Incarceration does not absolve a plaintiff of this responsibility.
Collins v. Pitchess, 641 F.2d 740, 742 (9th Cir. 1981). Nonetheless, in light of plaintiff's pro se status, the court will provide plaintiff a final opportunity to comply with the court's orders.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The May 11, 2018 order to show cause (ECF No. 29) is discharged;
2. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order3; and
3. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action.
