Summary
This is an order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in Juan Jimenez v. B. Cates, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01376-CDB. The court directs the Clerk to update the pro se plaintiff’s address and orders him to show cause within 21 days why the action should not be dismissed for failure to obey court orders and failure to prosecute. The order also permits the plaintiff to file a first amended complaint, a notice of voluntary dismissal, or notice electing to stand on his original complaint.
Holdings
- A district court may dismiss an action under its inherent docket-management authority when a party fails to prosecute, obey a court order, or comply with applicable local rules.
- A pro se party has a continuing obligation to notify the court and opposing parties of any change of address, and failure to do so may support dismissal without prejudice when court mail is returned and the party does not provide a current address within the period specified by the local rules.
Questions Presented
- Whether the court may impose dismissal as a sanction for failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute.
- Whether plaintiff should be ordered to show cause why the action should not be dismissed after failing to respond to the screening order and failing to maintain a current address with the court.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (4)
- Thompson v. Housing Authority, City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
- Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…