Saiz v. Hanford Police Department et al, No. 1:2012cv00912 - Document 41 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Matter referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii with objections to these Findings and Recommendations due within thirty days of service. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 12/16/2013. (Rooney, M)

Download PDF
Saiz v. Hanford Police Department et al Doc. 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MARTIN LOUIS SAIZ, 10 11 12 Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:12-CV-00912-AWI-SMS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE HANFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 On July 29, 2013, several orders mailed to Plaintiff Martin Louis Saiz were returned to the Clerk of Court as undeliverable following Plaintiff's release from prison. Local Rule 183 provides that "[i]f mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S. Postal Service, and if such Plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute." Plaintiff having failed to advise the Court and opposing parties of a current address for over sixty-three days, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii, United States District Court Judge, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72-304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within thirty (30) days after being served with a copy, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court, serving a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The Court will then review the 2 Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Plaintiff advised that failure to file 3 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 4 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 9 DATED: 12/16/2013 /s/ SANDRA M. SNYDER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.