Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05776/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05776-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Earl Crowell
Plaintiff
U.S. Bankcorp, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

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 

MICHAEL EARL CROWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

U.S. BANKCORP, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-05776-WHO 

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

RE: DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO 

PROSECUTE

Re: Dkt. No. 10

On December 23, 2015, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. Dkt. No. 

10. When plaintiff failed to file an opposition or other response to the motion, I issued an Order to 

Show Cause directing plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute. Dkt. No. 12. Then, when it appeared that plaintiff may not have received notice of 

defendant’s motion to dismiss or of the Order to Show Cause, I dissolved the Order to Show 

Cause, directed that the relevant filings and orders from this case be served on plaintiff by 

standard U.S. Mail, and gave plaintiff until February 24, 2016 to respond to defendant’s motion to 

dismiss. Dkt. No. 13. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is currently set for March 9, 2016. 

As of the date of this Order, plaintiff still has not filed an opposition or other response to 

defendant’s motion to dismiss. Accordingly, plaintiff is again ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE 

why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute by filing an opposition or other 

response to defendant’s motion to dismiss by March 9, 2016. If plaintiff does not file such 

response by that date, this case may be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 

41(b); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986) (listing factors relevant to 

whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute). 

If plaintiff files his opposition by March 9, 2016, defendant’s reply is due by March 16, 

Case 3:15-cv-05776-WHO Document 15 Filed 03/01/16 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

2016. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is RESET to March 30, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. in 

Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco, California. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2016 

______________________________________ 

WILLIAM H. ORRICK 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-05776-WHO Document 15 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 2