Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01935/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01935-6/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 Lonnie Lee Poslof, Sr. is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. 

On July 21, 2014, the undersigned dismissed Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, with leave to 

amend, for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. Plaintiff was directed to file an amended 

complaint within thirty days from the date of service of that order. The thirty day time period has 

expired and Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order. As a result, there is no pleading on 

file which sets forth any claims upon which relief may be granted. 

The Local Rules, corresponding with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provide: 

“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with ... any order of the Court may be grounds for the 

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions ... within the inherent power of the Court.” Local 

Rule 110. “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that power, 

LONNIE LEE POSLOF, Sr.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CDCR, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-01935-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE 

TO PROSECUTE AND COMPLY WITH THE 

COURT’S ORDER

[ECF No. 21]

Case 1:13-cv-01935-DAD-SAB Document 23 Filed 09/03/14 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

a court may impose sanctions including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Authority of 

Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). 

Accordingly, within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order Plaintiff is ordered 

to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order, or in 

the alternative, to file an amended complaint. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2014 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01935-DAD-SAB Document 23 Filed 09/03/14 Page 2 of 2