(PS) Blackshire v. Sacramento County, No. 2:2015cv01126 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/29/15 ORDERING that request for extension of time (ECF No. 9) is denied as moot and the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 8) are vacated. RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. F&R referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections to F&R due within fourteen days. (Kaminski, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BLACKSHIRE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. No. 2:15-cv-1126 KJM CKD PS ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SACRAMENTO COUNTY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 By order filed August 20, 2015, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave 18 to file an amended complaint was granted. After the thirty day period expired, plaintiff requested 19 an extension of time to file an amended complaint. The findings and recommendations filed 20 September 24, 2015 will therefore be vacated.1 It is apparent from plaintiff’s recent request for an extension of time that the claims raised 21 22 in the instant action are duplicative of those raised in an action previously filed by plaintiff, i.e. 23 Blackshire v. Sacramento County Sheriff, 2:15-cv-1123 MCD CKD PS (E.D. Cal.). In both 24 cases, plaintiff claims he was wrongfully incarcerated past a date on which he was due to be 25 released. In the prior action, the District Court has directed appointment of counsel and directed 26 ///// 27 28 1 Plaintiff’s request for extension of time was entered on the docket after entry of the findings and recommendations. 1 1 that the action will proceed on plaintiff’s third amended complaint. Under these circumstances, 2 the instant action should be dismissed as duplicative. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. Plaintiff’s request for extension of time (ECF No. 9) is denied as moot; 5 2. The findings and recommendations filed September 24, 2015 (ECF No. 8) are vacated; 6 7 8 and IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 9 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 10 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 11 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 12 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 13 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 14 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 15 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 Dated: September 29, 2015 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 4 blackshire1126.dup 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.
