(PS)Parker v. Facebook, et al.,, No. 2:2016cv02011 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/08/2016 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to pay the filing fee, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the courts order. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to F&R due within 21 days. (Butolph, J)

Download PDF
(PS)Parker v. Facebook, et al., Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AKIKA PARKER, 12 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-2011 TLN AC (PS) Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FACEBOOK, et al., 15 Defendants. 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 September 30, 19 2016, the court denied plaintiff’s application to proceed in form pauperis (“IFP”) because the 20 application omitted information about plaintiff’s income. ECF No. 4. The court granted plaintiff 21 30 days to renew the IFP application with all entries on the form completed, or to pay the filing 22 fee. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply could lead to a recommendation that the action 23 be dismissed. 24 Plaintiff failed to comply with the court’s order. Instead, plaintiff filed requests for entry 25 of default against defendants Facebook and Yahoo. ECF Nos. 5, 7. The requests were properly 26 denied by the Clerk of the Court. ECF Nos. 6, 8. 27 28 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to pay the filing fee, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 the court’s order. See Olivares v. Marshall, 59 F.3d 109, 112 (9th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal 2 for failure to pay partial filing fee under IFP statute); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (lack of prosecution); 3 Local Rule 110 (failure to comply with court orders). 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 6 (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 7 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 8 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 9 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 DATED: November 8, 2016 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.