(PS) Miller v. Sacramento City Unified School District, No. 2:2021cv00757 - Document 32 (E.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/08/21ORDERING plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE in writing within 14 days why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice based on plaintiff's failure to comply with the cou rt's order and failure to continue prosecuting this case. Plaintiff's filing within that deadline of a First Amended Complaint (or a notice of voluntary dismissal) in compliance with the undersigned's 29 10/14/21 findings and recommendations shall satisfy this OSC; and failure to timely comply with the terms of this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice. (Benson, A.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Miller v. Sacramento City Unified School District Doc. 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SONIA MAREE MILLER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 No. 2:21-cv-0757-JAM-CKD PS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel in this fee-paid employment discrimination action 19 against her employer, the Sacramento City Unified School District (the “School District”). 20 Plaintiff filed her original complaint against the School District as well as her teacher’s union and 21 two school administrators. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her claims against one of 22 the administrators, Judy Yang (ECF Nos. 23, 24), and on October 14, 2021, after a hearing, the 23 undersigned recommended granting the other three defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF No. 29). 24 The undersigned recommended dismissing with prejudice all claims against the teacher’s union 25 and the other school administrator, Norman Hernandez. (ECF No. 29 at 24.) The undersigned 26 also recommended dismissing all claims against the School District, but with leave to amend so 27 that plaintiff could try again to state any timely claims she may have against that defendant, 28 addressing the deficiencies identified in the findings and recommendations. (Id.) 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 The October 14th findings and recommendations also contained an order that—within 30 2 days of the District Judge’s order regarding the findings and recommendations—plaintiff was to 3 either file any First Amended Complaint or notify the court of her voluntary dismissal of the 4 action. (Id. at 23.) The order also warned that failure to timely amend the complaint would result 5 in a recommendation that the case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with a court 6 order, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Id. at 24.) 7 On November 5, 2021, the assigned District Judge issued an order adopting the findings 8 and recommendations in full. (ECF No. 31.) Thus, plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint or 9 notice of voluntary dismissal was due on December 6, 2021 (with December 5th being a Sunday, 10 see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1)(C)). The court has received neither these nor any other filings from 11 plaintiff since the October 14th findings and recommendations issued. 12 The court could recommend that this action be dismissed outright due to this missed 13 deadline. Nevertheless, in light of plaintiff’s self-represented status and the court’s desire to 14 resolve the action on the merits, the court first attempts lesser sanctions by issuing this order to 15 show cause. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 16 17 1. Within 14 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall show cause in writing why 18 this action should not be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of 19 Civil Procedure 41(b) based on plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s order 20 and failure to continue prosecuting this case; 2. Plaintiff’s filing within that deadline of a First Amended Complaint (or a notice of 21 22 voluntary dismissal) in compliance with the undersigned’s October 14, 2021 23 findings and recommendations shall satisfy this order to show cause; and 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 2 1 3. Failure to timely comply with the terms of this order will result in a 2 recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal 3 Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 4 Dated: December 8, 2021 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 19.mill.757 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
