(PC) Lavell Player v. Woodford et al, No. 1:2006cv00754 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Magistrate Judge William M. Wunderlich on 4/7/09: Recommending that this action 1 be dismissed, without prejudice, as duplicative; Objections to F&R due by 5/11/2009. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Lavell Player v. Woodford et al Doc. 16 1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 6 7 LAVELLE TYRONE PLAYER, Plaintiff, 8 9 vs. 1: 06 CV 0754 AWI WMW PC FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 10 11 12 13 J. WOODFORD, et al., Defendants. 14 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 17 On February 26, 2009, an order was entered, denying Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate 18 this case with case number 1:07-CV 1312 OWW DLB PC. In that order, the court noted that 19 both actions assert claims of excessive force and inadequate medical care resulting from the use 20 of force. Plaintiff was specifically directed that, should he desire to proceed in this action, he 21 should so inform the court. Plaintiff was advised that should he fail to inform the court of his 22 intention, a recommendation of dismissal would be entered, recommending dismissal of this 23 action, without prejudice, as duplicative. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the order of 24 February 26, 2009. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 26 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 prejudice, as duplicative. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 3 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days 4 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 5 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 6 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 7 shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised 8 that failure to file objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s 9 findings of fact. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). Failure to file 10 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 11 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: April 7, 2009 mmkd34 /s/ William M. Wunderlich UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
