Williams v. Jp World Enterprises Inc., No. 1:2021cv00686 - Document 49 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 48 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Without Prejudice Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint signed by District Judge Ana de Alba on 2/14/2023. CASE CLOSED. (Lawrence, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALLAN WILLIAMS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. JP WORLD ENTERPRISES, INC., 15 Case No. 1:21-cv-00686-ADA-CDB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF No. 48) Defendant. 16 17 Allan Williams (“Plaintiff”) began this action against Defendant Jp World Enterprises Inc. 18 (“Defendant”) on April 26, 2021. (ECF No. 1.) On November 11, 2021, Plaintiff filed a first 19 amended complaint. (ECF No. 24.) Plaintiff filed requests for entry of default against Defendant 20 on June 5, 2022, and June 6, 2022. (ECF Nos. 35, 37). The Court issued an order directing the 21 Clerk of Court to enter a default against Defendant on June 23, 2022. (ECF No. 41.) That same 22 day, the Clerk entered a default against Defendant. (ECF No. 42.) 23 On September 29, 2022, the Court issued an order vacating a scheduling conference and 24 reminding the parties to file a motion for default judgment or to dismiss action. (ECF No. 44.) 25 Neither party filed a motion. 26 On December 1, 2022, the Court issued an order to show cause why sanctions should not 27 be imposed for Plaintiff’s failure to file a motion for default judgment or to dismiss the action. 28 /// 1 (ECF No. 46.) Plaintiff failed to respond to the order to show cause within the required seven days 2 and the order remains outstanding as of the date of this order (more than two months later). 3 On December 19, 2022, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and 4 recommendations that the action be dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply 5 with a court order and failed to prosecute this case. 6 recommendations advised Plaintiff that he must file any objections within 21 days after service of 7 the order and that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 8 appeal the District Court’s order.” (Id. at 3-4.) Plaintiff did not file objections or any other response 9 to the findings and recommendations, and the deadline to do so has passed. (ECF No. 48.) The findings and 10 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), and Local Rule 304, this Court conducted a de novo 11 review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, this Court concludes the findings 12 and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 13 Accordingly, 14 1. The December 19, 2022, findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 48), are adopted in full; 15 2. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, (ECF No. 24), is dismissed without prejudice for failure 16 17 to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order; and 3. The Clerk of the Court be directed to close this case. 18 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 14, 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.