(PC) Christian v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al, No. 2:2015cv00541 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/30/15 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Christian v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al Doc. 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EMMETT WADE CHRISTIAN, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:15-cv-0541-JAM-EFB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. In reviewing the complaint, the court found that the question of proper venue was 20 not apparent from the face of the complaint. Accordingly, on June 29, 2015, the court ordered 21 plaintiff to show cause within thirty days why this action, which appears to be based upon events 22 that arose at the California Men’s Colony, should not be transferred to the United States District 23 Court for the Central District of California. ECF No. 9. On August 7, 2015, after plaintiff failed 24 to respond to the order to show cause, the undersigned recommended that this action be 25 dismissed. Plaintiff filed objections on August 14 and August 21, 2015. In his August 21, 2015 26 objections, plaintiff claimed that venue in this district was appropriate based on a “defendant at 27 Folsom State Prison.” Plaintiff’s original complaint, however, fails to show that any defendant at 28 Folsom State Prison violated his constitutional rights. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, on October 27, 2015, the court vacated the August 7, 2015 findings and 2 recommendations and granted plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint with 3 allegations showing that venue is proper in this district. That order warned plaintiff that failure to 4 comply may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 5 The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or 6 otherwise respond to the court’s order. Accordingly, it is hereby recommended that this action be 7 dismissed for failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110. 8 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 9 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 10 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 11 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 12 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 13 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 14 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 15 DATED: November 30, 2015. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.