Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01678/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01678-5/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLEAVE McCLOUD,

Plaintiff,

v.

LT. WADDLE,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:11-cv-01678-DAD-BAM-PC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE 

TO OBEY A COURT ORDER

(ECF NO. 40)

RESPONSE DUE IN FOURTEEN DAYS

Plaintiff Cleave McCloud is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. This action currently proceeds 

on Plaintiff’s October 5, 2011, complaint against Defendant Waddle for failure to protect 

Plaintiff in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 

On November 19, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 56. (ECF No. 34.) Plaintiff failed to file opposition to the motion and 

on December 29, 2015, Plaintiff was ordered to file opposition to the motion for summary 

judgment. (ECF No. 37.) Plaintiff failed to do so and on February 1, 2016, a recommendation of 

dismissal was entered, recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and 

failure to obey a court order. On February 22, 2016. Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and 

recommendations, along with a request for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 39.) On 

Case 1:11-cv-01678-DAD-BAM Document 43 Filed 05/17/16 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

March 2, 2016, an order was entered, vacating the findings and recommendations and denying 

Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel, and directing Plaintiff to file an opposition to 

the motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff was expressly warned that failure to 

comply with that order would result in dismissal of his action, with prejudice, for failure to 

prosecute. (Id. at 3:15.) On April 1, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file 

an opposition, which was granted on April 4, 2016. (ECF No. 41.) Plaintiff was granted an 

extension of time of thirty days. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, or otherwise been 

in contact with the Court. Plaintiff will be permitted one final opportunity to show cause why 

this action should not be dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause by WRITTEN 

response within fourteen (14) days of service or this order why this action should not be 

dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey the Court’s order and for failure to prosecute. 

Plaintiff is warned that if the response does not show GOOD CAUSE, this matter will be 

dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 17, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-01678-DAD-BAM Document 43 Filed 05/17/16 Page 2 of 2