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.

Midel Jackson v. Mathew Cates

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


February 28, 2012

MIDEL JACKSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MATHEW CATES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 20, 2011, defendants Cano, Zapata, Lopez, Petit, DeLacruz, Romero, Anices, Desimone, Zachariah, Palagummi and Aquilizan filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiff has failed to comply with the court's orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

On February 1, 2012, the court gave plaintiff twenty-one days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition and warned him that failure to do so could result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition, a statement of no opposition or otherwise responded to the court's order.*fn1

Plaintiff has been warned that he must file a response to defendants' motion. Plaintiff has disobeyed this court's orders and failed to prosecute this action. The appropriate sanction is dismissal without prejudice.

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

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 fourteen 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.