Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-02929/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-02929-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 465
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1983 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

VEER B SINGH,

Plaintiff,

v.

USCIS, U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND 

IMMIGRATION SERVICES,

Defendant.

No. 2:18-cv-2929 JAM DB PS

ORDER

Plaintiff Veer Singh is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore,

referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

On January 23, 2020, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 23.) The motion is noticed 

for hearing before the undersigned on March 13, 2020. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff 

was to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion “not less than 

fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed . . . hearing date.” Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a 

timely opposition or statement of non-opposition. 

The failure of a party to comply with the Local Rules or any order of the court “may be 

grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or 

within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or 

herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and

Case 2:18-cv-02929-JAM-DB Document 26 Filed 03/05/20 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

all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). Failure to comply with applicable rules and law may be 

grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local Rules. Id.

In light of plaintiff’s pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court will provide 

plaintiff with an opportunity to show good cause for plaintiff’s conduct along with a final 

opportunity to oppose defendant’s motion.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why 

this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution;

2. The March 13, 2020 hearing of defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 23) is 

continued to Friday, April 10, 2020, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I 

Street, Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned; 

3. On or before March 27, 2020, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of nonopposition to defendant’s motion1

; and 

4. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in the 

recommendation that this case be dismissed.

DATED: March 4, 2020 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action, plaintiff may comply with 

this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure.

Case 2:18-cv-02929-JAM-DB Document 26 Filed 03/05/20 Page 2 of 2