(PC) Rogers v. Nevada County, No. 2:2017cv01162 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/8/2019 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Huang, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Rogers v. Nevada County Doc. 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAURICE ROGERS, 12 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-1162-MCE-EFB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS NEVADA COUNTY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county inmate proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 20 On October 2, 2018, 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. 11. 23 The order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result a recommendation that this action 24 be dismissed. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended 25 complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 26 A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for 27 imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 28 inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. 2 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in 3 dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended 4 complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 5 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule 6 regarding notice of change of address affirmed). 7 8 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110. 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.” Any response to the 14 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 15 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 16 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 17 v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 18 Dated: November 8, 2018. 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.
