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.

Georgia A. Celentano v. Americans With Disabilities Office

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


September 27, 2012

GEORGIA A. CELENTANO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES OFFICE, SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT; SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT; JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA; AND DOES 1-10, DEFENDANTS.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 11, 2012, the undersigned dismissed plaintiff's first amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), but provided plaintiff thirty days to file a second amended complaint. Dckt. No. 10. The order explained that "[i]f plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint, the undersigned may recommend that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or for failure to comply with court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Local Rule 110." Id. at 6. Because the deadline passed and plaintiff failed to file a second amended complaint, on July 17, 2012, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations, recommending that the action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Dckt. No. 11.

On August 3, 2012, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. Dckt. No. 12. Although the objections did not respond to the findings and recommendations, and instead appeared to be challenging the analysis stated in this court's June 11, 2012 order dismissing plaintiff's first amended complaint, Dckt. No. 10, because plaintiff was attempting to prosecute this action, on August 22, 2012, the undersigned issued an order vacating the recommendation that the action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and granting plaintiff additional time to file an amended complaint.*fn1 Dckt. No. 13. Specifically, the order provided that plaintiff had thirty days to file a second amended complaint. Id. at 2. Plaintiff was admonished that if she failed to timely file a second amended complaint, the undersigned would once again recommend that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or for failure to comply with court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Local Rule 110.

The deadline has now passed and plaintiff has once again failed to timely file a second amended complaint. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 110.

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.