-DAD (TEMP)(PC) Leader v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al, No. 2:2008cv02123 - Document 30 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/28/2011 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 41(b) due to pltf's failure to prosecute this action and his failure to comply w/ the court's orders. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb; Objections due w/in 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
-DAD (TEMP)(PC) Leader v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al Doc. 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RUDOLPH PEDRO LEADER, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-08-2123 WBS DAD (TEMP) P vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., 14 15 Defendants. 16 17 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 10, 2010 defendant Maciel filed a motion for summary 19 judgment. On January 13, 2011, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non- 20 opposition to the pending motion within thirty days. In the same order, plaintiff was informed 21 that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed 22 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The thirty day period has now expired and plaintiff has not 23 responded to the court’s order. 24 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 25 dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute 26 this action and his failure to comply with the court’s orders. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 2 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 3 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 4 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 5 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 6 objections shall be filed and served within seven days after service of the objections. The parties 7 are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal 8 the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 9 DATED: February 28, 2011. 10 11 12 13 DAD:kc lead2123.41 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.