(PS) Bourn v. People of the State of California et al, No. 2:2010cv03067 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 5/26/11 RECOMMENDING that this Action be dismissed without prejudice, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. These FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are submitted to U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. 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. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
(PS) Bourn v. People of the State of California et al Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEVEN FLOYD BOURN, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 No. CIV S-10-3067 GEB EFB PS vs. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 This action in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona and in forma pauperis, is 17 before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 18 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On April 15, 2011, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for failure to 19 state a claim, with leave to amend, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Dckt. No. 6. The 20 dismissal order explained the complaint’s deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended 21 complaint correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended 22 complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 23 The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or 24 appropriately responded to the court’s order. On May 6, 2011, plaintiff filed a document titled 25 “Standing Objection,” which references the April 15 order, but does not excuse plaintiff’s failure 26 to file an amended complaint. Dckt. No. 7. In that filing, plaintiff claims that the defendants are 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 in default and that any orders or findings of the undersigned would be “refused” by plaintiff “for 2 good cause shown.”1 Dckt. No. 7 at 8. Plaintiff has not requested an extension of time or 3 otherwise indicated that he intends to file an amended complaint. 4 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 5 prejudice, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. 6 L.R. 110. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 8 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 9 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 10 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 11 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 12 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 13 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 14 Dated: May 26, 2011. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 The Clerk of the Court appropriately declined plaintiff’s request for entry of default on May 13, 2011, noting that plaintiff’s complaint had been dismissed with leave to amend on April 15, 2011. Dckt. No. 8. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.