(PC) Robben v. Norling, No. 2:2016cv02699 - Document 31 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 5/21/2018 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

Download PDF
(PC) Robben v. Norling Doc. 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TODD ROBBEN, 12 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-2699-WBS-EFB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GLENN NORLING, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983.1 This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 19 § 636(b)(1). 20 On August 3, 2017, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 21 § 1915A. The court dismissed the complaint, explained the deficiencies therein and granted 22 plaintiff thirty days in which file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. ECF No. 19. 23 The order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result a recommendation that this action 24 be dismissed. The district judge granted plaintiff’s motion to stay this action in an order filed 25 December 21, 2017. ECF No. 28. That order stayed this action until May 14, 2018, and directed 26 plaintiff to file his amended complaint by the expiration of the stay. The order further 27 28 1 Plaintiff was a county inmate at the time he commenced this action. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 admonished plaintiff that if he failed to do so, “this action will be dismissed in accordance with 2 the magistrate judge’s order of August 3, 2017.” 3 4 5 The stayed has now expired, the time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for 6 imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 7 inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or 8 without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. 9 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in 10 dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended 11 complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 12 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule 13 regarding notice of change of address affirmed). 14 15 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110. 16 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 17 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 18 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 19 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 20 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 21 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 22 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 23 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 24 v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 25 Dated: May 21, 2018. 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.