Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00141/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00141-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bren Sarver
Plaintiff
The City of Bakersfield
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

On January 9, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s former attorneys’ motion to withdraw from 

his representation. (Doc. 23) In addition, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within 21 days 

why the matter should not be dismissed for his failure to prosecute this action. Id. at 3. 

On January 29, 2015, Plaintiff filed a letter disputing that he had failed to maintain contact 

with his lawyers though he provided no explanation for why, if this was the case, he failed to respond 

to the requests of counsel to allow them to substitute off the case or why he failed to respond to their 

motion to withdraw. (Doc. 24) In any event, Plaintiff asserts that he has consulted a new lawyer who 

is “actively reviewing” his case and that he intends to prosecute this action. Id. Thus, the order to 

show case is DISCHARGED.

However, Plaintiff is ORDERED to either substitute counsel into this case to represent him or 

to take action all necessary steps to prosecute this case on his own. He is advised that the longer he 

waits to bring in new counsel, the less likely it is that the Court will be willing to extend the deadlines 

BREN SARVER,

 Plaintiff,

v.

THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00141- JLT 

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE

(Doc. 24)

Case 1:14-cv-00141-JLT Document 25 Filed 02/02/15 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

set forth in the case schedule. Indeed, due to Plaintiff’s failure to allow his previous counsel to 

withdraw without the need for a motion, the case has been at a virtual standstill since early December; 

no further unnecessary delays will be tolerated.

Failure to comply with the Court’s order will result in the imposition of sanctions up to 

and including dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 2, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00141-JLT Document 25 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 2