Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00109/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00109-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NIKKO JAVOR QUARLES,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON 

CORCORAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00109-AWI-JDP

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS 

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE 

TO COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Nikko Javor Quarles is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil 

rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s complaint was screened on July 17, 

2019, and plaintiff was ordered to respond within thirty days. ECF No. 10. On August 15, 

2019, plaintiff moved for a thirty-day extension, ECF No. 13, which we granted, ECF No. 14. 

Plaintiff, however, has filed neither a response to the screening order nor a first amended 

complaint.

To manage our docket effectively, we impose deadlines and require litigants to meet 

those deadlines. When a plaintiff fails to comply with court-imposed deadlines, the court may 

dismiss the plaintiff’s case for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; Hells Canyon Pres. 

Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he consensus among our 

sister circuits, with which we agree, is that courts may dismiss under Rule 41(b) sua sponte, at 

least under certain circumstances.”). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but the court has 

a duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See 

Case 1:19-cv-00109-AWI-HBK Document 16 Filed 03/03/20 Page 1 of 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

2

Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 

We will give plaintiff the opportunity to explain why the court should not dismiss his

case for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this order will constitute another

failure to comply with a court order and will result in dismissal of this case. Accordingly, 

plaintiff must show cause within thirty days of the date of entry of this order why the court 

should not dismiss his case for failure to prosecute. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 2, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 204.

Case 1:19-cv-00109-AWI-HBK Document 16 Filed 03/03/20 Page 2 of 2