Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pinckney v. Yuba Community College

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 9, 2009

DELANO LAMONT PINCKNEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
YUBA COMMUNITY COLLEGE, DEFENDANT.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On February 4, 2009, plaintiff, who proceeds in pro se,*fn1 was ordered to: (1) show cause in writing, on or before February 18, 2009, why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant's Motion to Quash or Dismiss for Insufficient Process and Service, Dckt. No. 31; and (2) file an opposition or statement of no opposition to defendant's motion. Dckt. No. 37. Plaintiff was cautioned that "[f]ailure to comply with this order shall be construed as abandonment of this case, and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed." Dckt. No. 37, at p. 2.

The court's order was repeatedly returned as "undeliverable"*fn2 and the deadline has long since passed. Plaintiff has neither responded to the court's order nor otherwise communicated with the court and it appears that plaintiff has abandoned this case.

As the court explained in its last order, plaintiff's failure to participate in this action warrants its dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (authorizing dismissal of an action "[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order . . ."); see also E. D. Cal. L. R. 11-110 ("Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court"). Plaintiff's pro se status does not derogate this authority. E. D. Cal. L. R. 83-183.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the federal and local rules of court, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal. L. R. 11-110; and

2. Defendant's motion to quash, Dckt. No. 31, be denied as moot.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.