Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01201/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01201-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Stephen N. Danel
Plaintiff
Shaheen
Defendant

Document Text:

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

STEPHEN N. DANEL,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

DR. SHAHEEN,

 Defendant.

1:15-cv-01201-GSA-PC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS 

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO OBEY COURT ORDER

(ECF No. 3.) 

TWENTY-DAY DEADLINE TO RESPOND

On August 6, 2015, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to submit an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $400.00 filing fee for this action, within 

forty-five days. (ECF No. 3.) The forty-five day period has now expired, and Plaintiff has not 

complied with the Court’s order or otherwise responded to the Court's 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 August 3, 2015. Plaintiff's failure to respond to the Court's order 

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 

resolving payment of the filing fee for his lawsuit. Thus, both the first and second factors 

weigh in favor of dismissal.

Case 1:15-cv-01201-LJO-EPG Document 4 Filed 10/08/15 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

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 file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee for 

this case 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. Monetary sanctions of little 

use, and given the early stage of these proceedings, the preclusion of evidence or witnesses is 

not available. However, inasmuch as the dismissal being considered in this case is without 

prejudice, the Court is stopping short of issuing the harshest possible sanction of dismissal 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 twenty (20) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required 

to file a response to this order, showing cause why this case should not be dismissed for 

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s order of August 6, 2015; and

2. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order shall result in the dismissal of this 

action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 8, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01201-LJO-EPG Document 4 Filed 10/08/15 Page 2 of 2