FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED AND FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN 21 DAYS
On August 5, 2010, Plaintiff Alvaro Quezada ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action in Santa Clara Superior Court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging Defendants conspired, retaliated, and were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff's medical needs for complaining about the unsafe workplace. Doc. 1. On March 29, 2012, the undersigned dismissed Plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e). Doc. 14. On April 18, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion for a sixty (60) day extension of time to file a first amended complaint. Doc. 16. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the Court's order or requested a further extension of time.
"In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, the district court is required to consider several factors: '(1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation;
(2) the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.'" Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988) (quoting Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986)). These factors guide a court in deciding what to do, and are not conditions that must be met in order for a court to take action. In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability Litigation, 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006).
In this instance, Plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise responded to the Court's orders. As a result, there is no pleading on file that sets forth any claims upon which relief may be granted under § 1983. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e), the undersigned HEREBY RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under § 1983 and for failure to prosecute.
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one (21) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991).
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...