(PC) Anderson v. De La Cruz et al, No. 1:2010cv02123 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Dismissal of Plaintiff's 1 Action With Prejudice For Failure to State a Claim, signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 9/19/2011, referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Marrujo, C)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Anderson v. De La Cruz et al Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 NATHAN ANDERSON, 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:10-cv-02123-LJO-GBC (PC) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RE COMME NDING D I S M I S S A L O F PLAINTIFF’S ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS v. DE LA CRUZ, et al., 14 / 15 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 17 18 19 Plaintiff Nathan Anderson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 24, 2011, 20 the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s original complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to state 21 a claim. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint within thirty 22 days. (Id.) Plaintiff also was warned that failure to comply with the Court’s Order may 23 result in dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be 24 25 26 27 granted. (Id.) On August 1, 2011, the Court issued a Show Cause Order. (ECF No. 11.) The Show Cause Order again warned Plaintiff that the case would be dismissed if Plaintiff Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 failed to respond to the Order and/or file an amended complaint by September 6, 2011. (Id.) To date, the Court has not received a response to the Show Cause Order and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. As a result, there is no pleading on file which sets 4 5 forth any claims upon which relief may be granted. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court 6 7 HEREBY RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED, with prejudice, based on 8 Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under Section 1983. 9 These Findings and Recommendation will be submitted to the United States District 10 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 11 12 13 thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendation, the parties may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections 14 to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.” The parties are advised that failure 15 to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 16 order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Dated: 1j0bbc September 19, 2011 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
]]>
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.
