Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-06518/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-06518-0/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

ANTONIO GILMORE,

Plaintiff,

v.

KATRINA LAKE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-06518-MEJ 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On November 9, 2016, Plaintiff Antonio Gilmore filed a Complaint and an Application to 

Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Compl., Dkt. No. 1; Appl., Dkt. No. 2. On November 9, 2016, the 

Clerk of Court directed Plaintiff to either consent to or decline magistrate jurisdiction within 14 

days of filing, or November 23, 2016; the Clerk also set case management deadlines. See Order 

Setting Initial CMC and ADR Deadlines (“CMC Order”), Dkt. No. 3. On November 21, 2016, the 

undersigned granted Plaintiff’s Application. Dkt. No. 4. The Court served each of these 

documents on Plaintiff at the address he had provided to the Court via first class mail. Each 

document was returned to the Court as undeliverable. See First Mail Return Receipt, Dkt. No. 6; 

Second Mail Return Receipt, Dkt. No. 7; Third Mail Return Receipt, Dkt. No. 8). Plaintiff has 

failed to update his address of record with the Court, and has not prosecuted the action since 

initially filing the Complaint.

Based on this inaction, the Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff Antonio Gilmore to show 

cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with 

court deadlines. Plaintiff shall file a declaration by February 6, 2017. If a responsive declaration 

is filed, the Court shall either issue an order based on the declaration or conduct a hearing on 

February 9, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom B, 15th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San 

Francisco, California. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be 

deemed an admission that Plaintiff does not intend to prosecute, and the case will be dismissed 

Case 3:16-cv-06518-JST Document 9 Filed 01/25/17 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

without prejudice. Thus, it is imperative that the Court receive a written response by the deadline 

above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2017

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:16-cv-06518-JST Document 9 Filed 01/25/17 Page 2 of 2