(PC) Serna v. Sullivan et al, No. 1:2018cv01650 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, Recommending that this Case be Dismissed, with Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim, Failure to Obey a Court Order, and Failure to Prosecute 1 , 14 ; Referred to Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 12/05/2019. Objections to F&R if any due within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS. (Orozco, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NORBERTO SERNA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. SULLIVAN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 1:18-cv-01650-LJO-GSA-PC FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE BE DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER, AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE (ECF No. 14.) OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS 17 18 19 Norberto Serna (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 20 with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title II of the Americans with 21 Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12132. On June 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed the Complaint 22 commencing this action at the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 23 (ECF No. 1.) The Complaint was not signed. On August 15, 2018, the Northern District court 24 notified Plaintiff that he had not signed the Complaint, and on August 27, 2018, Plaintiff re- 25 submitted the Complaint bearing his signature. (ECF No. 5.) 26 On November 19, 2018, the Northern District court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims against 27 Santa Clara County Superior Court and transferred the remaining claims to this court. (ECF No. 28 9.) 1 1 On September 27, 2019, the court screened the signed Complaint and issued an order 2 dismissing the Complaint for failure to state a claim and for violation of Rule 18 of the Federal 3 Rules of Civil Procedure, with leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 4 14.) The thirty-day deadline has now expired and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint 5 or otherwise responded to the court’s order. As a result, there is no pleading on file which sets 6 forth any claims upon which relief may be granted. 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 8 1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, this case be DISMISSED, with prejudice, based 9 on Plaintiff’s failure to obey a court order, failure to prosecute, violation of Rule 10 18(a), and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983 11 or the ADA; and 12 2. 13 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 14 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 15 (14) days from the date of service of these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file 16 written objections with the court. 17 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 18 objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. 19 Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 20 (9th Cir. 1991)). The Clerk be directed to close this case. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to 21 22 23 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 5, 2019 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.
