(PS) Rubang, Jr. v. Focarino, et al., No. 2:2016cv00088 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/28/2016 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.. Objections to F&R due within 21 days. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
(PS) Rubang, Jr. v. Focarino, et al. Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GONZALO R. RUBANG, JR.,, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:16-cv-00088 GEB AC Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 18 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On June 16, 2016, the 19 court dismissed the complaint (ECF No. 14), and on June 17, 2016, plaintiff was granted 30 days 20 to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 15). Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to timely file and 21 amended complaint would lead to a recommendation that the action be dismissed. Plaintiff has 22 not filed an amended complaint. His only post-dismissal filing was a letter expressing 23 disagreement with the court’s ruling. ECF No. 16. 24 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 25 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 26 Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 2 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 3 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 4 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 5 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 DATED: November 28, 2016 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.