(PC) Rice v. Bauer et al, No. 2:2015cv00236 - Document 25 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 10/13/2015 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
(PC) Rice v. Bauer et al Doc. 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KORDY RICE, 12 No. 2:15-cv-236-JAM-EFB P Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 D. BAUER, et al., 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 17 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 24, 2015, defendants Bauer, Lanigan, Rodriguez and Thompson filed a 19 motion to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiff failed to exhaust his claim as to defendant Lanigan 20 and that his action is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 12(b)(6). The time for acting passed, and plaintiff failed to file an opposition or otherwise 22 respond to the motion. On August 31, 2015, the court warned plaintiff that failure to respond to the motion could 23 24 result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The court 25 also granted plaintiff a 21-day extension of time to respond. By order filed September 9, 2015, 26 plaintiff was granted an additional extension of thirty days to file his opposition. 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 The time for acting has once again passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition, a 2 statement of no opposition, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Plaintiff has disobeyed 3 this court’s orders and failed to prosecute this action. The appropriate action is dismissal without 4 prejudice. 5 6 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110, 183(b). 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 8 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 9 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 10 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 11 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 12 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 13 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 14 Dated: October 13, 2015. 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.