Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07771/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-07771-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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

AL DAVIS JONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAISY SINNGH, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:18-cv-07771-KAW 

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 22

On January 28, 2020, the Court held a case management conference, where Plaintiff Al 

Davis Jones did not appear. Plaintiff also did not file a case management statement 7 days prior to 

the case management conference as required by the undersigned’s standing order. (See Judge 

Westmore’s Standing Order ¶ 8.) 

On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff was ordered to show cause by February 24, 2020 why the 

case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Dkt. No. 22 at 1.) Plaintiff was cautioned 

that the “[f]ailure to timely respond to this order to show cause may result in this case being 

reassigned to a district judge with the recommendation that it be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute.” Id. Plaintiff was referred to the Federal Pro Bono Project’s Help Desk for assistance in 

responding to the order to show cause. Id. at 1-2. Plaintiff was advised that the summonses were 

returned unexecuted, because the U.S. Marshal was unable to locate the out-of-state defendants, 

who are accused of defrauding Plaintiff, and that, procedurally, the case cannot go forward at this 

time, because Plaintiff cannot obtain a valid judgment against non-appearing parties who have not 

been served. Id. at 1. 

To date, Plaintiff has not filed a response to the order to show nor has he filed a voluntary 

dismissal.

Case 4:18-cv-07771-KAW Document 23 Filed 03/03/20 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

Accordingly, the Court issues a SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, and Plaintiff is 

ordered to respond in writing, by no later than March 20, 2020, why the case should not be 

dismissed for failure to prosecute. Alternatively, Plaintiff may file a voluntary dismissal.

Failure to timely respond to this order to show cause will result in this case being 

reassigned to a district judge with the recommendation that it be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 

In responding to this order to show cause, Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro 

Bono Project’s Help Desk for assistance—a free service for pro se litigants—by calling (415) 782-

8982. Plaintiff may also wish to consult a manual the court has adopted to assist pro se litigants in 

presenting their case. This manual, and other free information for pro se litigants, is available 

online at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2020

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:18-cv-07771-KAW Document 23 Filed 03/03/20 Page 2 of 2