Ricks v. Resources for Independence Central Valley et al, No. 1:2015cv00893 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: Findings and Recommendations recommending dismissal for failure to prosecute, signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 10/8/2015. Matter referred to Judge Ishii. Objections to F&R due by 11/12/2015. (Rosales, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 MELVIN RICKS, 9 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:15-CV-893-AWI-SMS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE RESOURCES FOR INDEPENDENCE CENTRAL VALLEY; MICHAEL BORUNDA; ROBERT HAND, 13 Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff Melvin Ricks, proceeding in pro se and in forma pauperis, filed an employment 16 discrimination complaint on June 12, 2015. Doc. 1. On July 21, 2014, this Court screened the 17 complaint and dismissed it in part with leave to amend. Doc. 4. That order directed Plaintiff to file 18 an amended complaint or notify the Court in writing that he wishes to proceed only on claims 19 found to be cognizable. Doc. 4. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with that order would 20 result in this action being dismissed without prejudice. Doc. 4. Service was effectuated the same 21 day. Doc. 5. As of October 6, 2015, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or notified the 22 court in writing of his willingness to proceed only on claims found to be cognizable. 23 24 25 Hence, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the action is DISMISSED without prejudice, and the case closed. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Court 26 Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72- 27 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of 28 California. Within thirty (30) days after being served with a copy, Petitioner may file written 1 objections with the Court, serving a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 2 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The Court will then review 3 the Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that 4 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 5 Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 8, 2015 /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.