(PS) Teang v. Mayopoulos, No. 2:2015cv01843 - Document 5 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/26/16 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the courts orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. R. 110. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr; Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
(PS) Teang v. Mayopoulos Doc. 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SREY TEANG, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:15-cv-1843 MCE AC (PS) v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TIMOTHY J. MAYOPOULOS, 15 Defendant. 16 On January 29, 2016, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause why this action should not 17 18 be dismissed for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s prior order. ECF 19 No. 4. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this 20 case. 21 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 22 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s orders. See Fed. R. 23 Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. R. 110. 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one (21) 26 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 27 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 28 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 2 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 DATED: February 26, 2016 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 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.