IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 25, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
DANIEL E. THOMAS, DEFENDANT.
This action was referred to the undersigned under Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On March 19, 2010, the assigned district judge issued an order setting a status (pretrial scheduling) conference for May 24, 2010 and directing the parties to file a status report within fourteen days of the scheduled conference.*fn1 Dckt. No. 3 at 3-5. On May 17, 2010, plaintiff filed a status report in accordance with the March 19 order; however, no such status report has been filed by defendant.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. On or before June 16, 2010, defendant shall file a status report addressing the issues raised in the district judge's March 19, 2010 order, Dckt. No. 3 at 3-5.
2. Plaintiff is not required to file a further status report or a response to defendant's status report, but if it elects to do so, any such status report or response to defendant's status report shall be filed on or before June 23, 2010.
3. Failing to obey federal or local rules, or order of this court, may result in sanctions, including dismissal of the action or the entry of default judgment against defendant. See Local Rule 110 (providing that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court."). Even though the court will construe pro se pleadings liberally, pro se litigants must comply with the procedural rules.