-DAD (TEMP)(PC) Coffee v. Sisto, et al, No. 2:2009cv00134 - Document 29 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 04/21/11 recommending that this action be dismissed pursuant to FRCP 41(b). Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
-DAD (TEMP)(PC) Coffee v. Sisto, et al Doc. 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MORRIS LAMONT COFFEE, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-09-0134 WBS DAD (TEMP) P vs. D. K. SISTO, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 17 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January18, 2011 defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. On 18 March 10, 2011, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition 19 within thirty days. In the same order, plaintiff was informed that failure to file an opposition 20 would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 21 The thirty day period has now expired and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s March 10, 22 2011 order. 23 24 25 26 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 2 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 3 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 4 objections shall be filed and served within seven days after service of the objections. The parties 5 are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal 6 the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 7 DATED: April 21, 2011. 8 9 10 11 DAD:kc coff0134.41 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2