Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00667/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00667-2/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

NICHOLAS ESTRADA,

Plaintiff,

v.

NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:18-cv-00667-SAB (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW 

CAUSE IN WRITING WHY ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO 

OBEY A COURT ORDER, AND FAILURE 

TO STATE A CLAIM

(ECF Nos. 17, 23)

FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Nicholas Estrada is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Plaintiff filed his original complaint on May 16, 2018. (ECF No. 1.) Before his original 

complaint could be screened, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on July 20, 2018. (ECF 

No. 7.) On February 28, 2019, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and granted 

Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint. (ECF No. 9.)

After receiving three extensions of time, Plaintiff filed his second amended complaint on 

July 22, 2019. (ECF No. 16.) On September 23, 2019, the Court screened Plaintiff’s second 

amended complaint and found that Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 

17.) The Court’s screening order provided Plaintiff with the pleading and legal standards that 

applied to his claims and granted Plaintiff leave to file a third amended complaint within thirty 

days after service of the order. (ECF No. 17.)

On November 8, 2019, after Plaintiff failed to timely file a third amended complaint or 

Case 1:18-cv-00667-DAD-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/06/20 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

otherwise communicate with the Court, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why 

this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to obey a court order, and 

failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 20.) The Court granted Plaintiff fourteen (14) days from the 

service of the order to either file a third amended complaint or a written response showing cause 

why this action should not be dismissed. (Id.)

In response to the November 8, 2019 order to show cause, Plaintiff filed a motion for a 

30-day extension of time to file a third amended complaint on November 25, 2019. (ECF No. 

22.) 

On November 26, 2019, the Court vacated the November 8, 2019 order to show cause, 

granted Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time, and ordered Plaintiff to file a third amended 

complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of service of the order. (ECF No. 23.)

However, Plaintiff has not filed a third amended complaint or otherwise communicated 

with the Court, and the time in which to do so has passed.

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

service of this order, Plaintiff shall show cause in writing why the instant action should not be 

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s September 23, 2019 and November 

26, 2019 orders, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a claim for relief. Plaintiff can comply 

with this order to show cause by filing a third amended complaint in compliance with the Court’s 

September 23, 2019 screening order. Plaintiff is warned that failure to comply with this order 

will result in a recommendation to a District Judge that the instant action be dismissed, with 

prejudice, for failure to prosecute, failure to obey a court order, and failure to state a cognizable 

claim for relief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 6, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-00667-DAD-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/06/20 Page 2 of 2