Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00150/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00150-0/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Gary Ray Bettencourt (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, initiated in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 2, 2016. (ECF 

No. 1.) On February 3, 2016, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either consent to or decline to Magistrate 

Judge jurisdiction within thirty (30) days of service of that order. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff failed to 

comply with the order. 

On March 21, 2016, the Court issued a second order requiring Plaintiff to file a consent or 

decline form within thirty (30) days of service of that order. (ECF No. 6.) More than forty (40) days

GARY RAY BETTENCOURT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

L. PARKS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00150-BAM (PC)

ORDER TO FILE CONSENT OR DECLINE FORM 

OR SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE 

TO PROSECUTE

(ECF Nos. 3, 6)

ORDER TO CLERK’S OFFICE TO SEND 

PLAINTIFF A THIRD ORDER RE CONSENT OR 

DECLINE TO MAGISTRATE JURISDICTION

FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE

Case 1:16-cv-00150-KES-BAM Document 7 Filed 05/03/16 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

has passed since the second order was served, and Plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise 

responded to either of the Court’s orders.

Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Local 

Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 

sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Further, the failure of Plaintiff to prosecute this 

action is grounds for dismissal. In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability Litigation, 460 

F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006). 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within fourteen (14) days from the date of 

service of this order, Plaintiff shall either:

1. Complete and return the Order Re Consent or Request for Reassignment, a copy of 

which is attached hereto; or

2. Show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 

3. Plaintiff is warned that the failure to respond to this order will result in dismissal 

of this action for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 3, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00150-KES-BAM Document 7 Filed 05/03/16 Page 2 of 2