Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07513/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07513-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANDRA TORA HOLLANDSWORTH,

Plaintiff,

v.

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA, 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:18-cv-07513-KAW 

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. Nos. 9, 14

On December 13, 2018, Plaintiff filed this civil action and application to proceed in forma 

pauperis. On February 27, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court then screened Plaintiff’s complaint and 

found it deficient, finding that Plaintiff had failed to set forth a “short and plain statement of the 

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” (Dkt. No. 13 at 3.) The Court ordered Plaintiff 

to file an amended complaint that provided the legal and factual basis for all claims by March 27, 

2019. Id. The Court warned that the failure to do so would result in the case being reassigned to a 

district judge with the recommendation that the case be dismissed. Id.

On March 22, 2019, Plaintiff filed an administrative motion requesting that the deadline to 

file her amended complaint be extended to May 29, 2019, which was granted. (Dkt. Nos. 11 & 

13.) Plaintiff was referred to the Federal Pro Bono Project’s Help Desk for assistance. (Dkt. No. 

13 at 1.) Plaintiff did not file her amended complaint by the deadline, and, on June 6, 2018, the 

undersigned issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute. (Dkt. No. 14 at 1.) Plaintiff was given until June 28, 2019 to file both a response to the 

order to show cause and her first amended complaint. To date, Plaintiff has done neither. 

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause, by August 12, 2019, why the 

Case 4:18-cv-07513-YGR Document 15 Filed 07/17/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, why she did not timely file the amended 

complaint, and why she did not timely respond to the first order to show cause. Additionally, 

Plaintiff shall file the first amended complaint. The response to the second order to show cause 

and the first amended complaint should be filed as separate documents. Failure to file both 

documents by the deadline will result in the Court reassigning the case to a district judge with the 

recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute.

Again, Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project's Help Desk for 

assistance—a free service for pro se litigants—by calling (415) 782-8982 to make an appointment. 

Plaintiff may also wish to consult the manual the court has adopted to assist pro se litigants in 

presenting their case. This manual, and other free information for pro se litigants, is available 

online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants.

Lastly, the August 20, 2019 case management conference is continued to September 17, 

2019 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 4, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California. Case management 

statements are due on or before September 10, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 17, 2019

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:18-cv-07513-YGR Document 15 Filed 07/17/19 Page 2 of 2