Iliya v. United States Marshalls Service
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:24-cv-03720
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Iliya v. United States Marshals Service, Judge Hixson ordered a response explaining why the case should not be dismissed after Iliya missed a filing deadline.
Dauda Iliya must respond by April 21, 2025, or the case may be dismissed; the United States Marshals Service may reply if he files an opposition.
What happened
Dauda Iliya sued the United States Marshals Service, which filed a motion to dismiss. Iliya did not file an opposition that complied with the court’s local rule.
The court canceled the scheduled April 17, 2025 hearing and ordered Iliya to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to move the case forward and follow court deadlines. By April 21, 2025, he must file a declaration and either a compliant opposition or a statement saying he does not oppose the motion. If he files an opposition, the Marshals Service may reply by April 28, 2025.
Judge Thomas S. Hixson warned that failing to respond would be treated as an admission that Iliya did not intend to continue the case and that the case would likely be dismissed. This order did not dismiss the case or decide the motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Iliya v. United States Marshalls Service · No. 3:24-cv-03720
- Thomas Hixson
- Apr. 7, 2025
Background
The United States Marshals Service filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff Dauda Iliya did not file an opposition that complied with Civil Local Rule 7. The court identified the failure to file and failure to meet court deadlines as possible failures to prosecute, meaning failures to actively move the case forward.
Order to Show Cause
The court vacated the April 17, 2025 hearing date and issued a third order requiring Iliya to show cause—explain why the case should not be dismissed—for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. The court also ordered Iliya to explain why the Marshals Service’s motion to dismiss should not be granted.
Iliya must file a declaration by April 21, 2025, together with either an opposition complying with Civil Local Rule 7-3(a) or a statement of nonopposition complying with Local Civil Rule 7-3(b). If Iliya files an opposition, the Marshals Service may file a reply by April 28, 2025.
Disposition
Judge Thomas S. Hixson warned that failure to submit a written response would be treated as an admission that Iliya did not intend to prosecute the case and that the case would likely be dismissed. The order itself did not dismiss the case, grant the motion to dismiss, or decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.