Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01974/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01974-9/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

PASQUAL GOSSELIN,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

J. TILTON, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:10-cv-01974-GSA-PC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS 

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED, 

WITH PREJUDICE, FOR PLAINTIFF’S 

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT 

ORDER AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE FOR 

PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND

Pasqual Gosselin (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action now proceeds on the First Amended 

Complaint filed by Plaintiff on December 29, 2012, against defendants R. Hubach, J. Tabor, 

and D. Latraille for adverse conditions of confinement, in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 

against defendants J. Tabor and D. Latraille for use of excessive force against Plaintiff, in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment; against defendant R. Hubach for failure to protect 

Plaintiff, in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against defendant D. Adams for 

implementation of policy violating Plaintiff’s rights under the Fourth Amendment and rights to 

privacy. (Doc. 11.) 

The parties to this action have consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(c). (Docs. 6, 33.) Therefore, the undersigned shall conduct any 

and all proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment. 

Case 1:10-cv-01974-GSA Document 54 Filed 07/23/15 Page 1 of 3
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

On February 17, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 43.) 

Under Local Rule 230(l), Plaintiff was required to file an opposition or a statement of nonopposition to the motion within twenty-one days. L.R. 230(l). On April 6, 2015, Plaintiff 

requested a sixty-day extension of time to respond to the motion for summary judgment, which 

was granted by the court on April 17, 2015. (Docs. 47, 50.) The sixty-day time period has now

passed, and Plaintiff has not filed a response to the motion for summary judgment or otherwise 

responded to the court’s April 17, 2015 order.

In determining whether to dismiss this action for failure to comply with the directives 

set forth in its order, Athe Court must weigh the following factors: (1) the public=s interest in 

expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court=s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of 

prejudice to defendants/respondents; (4) the availability of less drastic alternatives; and (5) the 

public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits.@ Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 

639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992)).

A>The public=s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation always favors dismissal,=@

id. (quoting Yourish v. California Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 1999)), and here, the 

action has been pending since October 12, 2010. Plaintiff's failure to file a response to 

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment may reflect Plaintiff's disinterest in prosecuting this 

case. In such an instance, the Court cannot continue to expend its scarce resources assisting a 

litigant who will not help himself by defending his case against summary judgment. Thus, both 

the first and second factors weigh in favor of dismissal.

Turning to the risk of prejudice, Apendency of a lawsuit is not sufficiently prejudicial in 

and of itself to warrant dismissal.@ Id. (citing Yourish at 991). However, Adelay inherently 

increases the risk that witnesses= memories will fade and evidence will become stale,@ id., and it 

is Plaintiff's failure to respond to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment that is causing 

delay. Therefore, the third factor weighs in favor of dismissal.

As for the availability of lesser sanctions, at this stage in the proceedings there is little 

available to the Court which would constitute a satisfactory lesser sanction while protecting the 

Court from further unnecessary expenditure of its scarce resources. The dismissal being 

Case 1:10-cv-01974-GSA Document 54 Filed 07/23/15 Page 2 of 3
3

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

considered in this case is with prejudice, which is the harshest possible sanction. However, the 

Court finds this sanction appropriate in light of the fact that five months have passed since 

Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment, and Plaintiff has yet to file an adequate 

response. Given the stage of these proceedings, dismissal of the case without prejudice would 

prejudice Defendants who have spent considerable time and effort litigating this action, and 

have brought a motion for summary judgment which may result in resolution of this case on the 

merits. Moreover, Plaintiff shall be granted an opportunity to show cause why the case should 

not be dismissed with prejudice.

Finally, because public policy favors disposition on the merits, this factor will always 

weigh against dismissal. Id. at 643.

///

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required to 

file a response in writing to this order, showing cause why this case should not 

be dismissed, with prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to obey the court’s order and 

failure to prosecute this action;

2. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order to show cause shall result in the 

dismissal of this case, with prejudice, without further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 23, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01974-GSA Document 54 Filed 07/23/15 Page 3 of 3