(HC) Clark v. Fisher, No. 2:2017cv02574 - Document 33 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 2/6/2019 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
(HC) Clark v. Fisher Doc. 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAKE CLARK, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-02574 TLN GGH P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RAYTHEL FISHER, JR., 15 Respondent. 16 On September 4, 2018, the court dismissed petitioner’s petition and motion for stay and 17 18 abeyance. ECF No. 29. Petitioner was granted 30 days to file an amended petition in compliance 19 with the instructions provided in the order. Id. On December 17, 2018, the court issued an order 20 again ordering the petitioner to file an amended petition within 30 days. ECF No. 32. The court 21 rejected petitioner’s submission as a petition, ECF No. 30, based on petitioner’s piecemeal 22 response to part of his claims but not all, and accordingly ordered petitioner to file an amended 23 petition consistent with the court’s instructions. ECF No. 32. Petitioner was advised that the 24 December 17, 2018 order, like the September 4, 2018 order, was not optional and that “[i]f the 25 amended petition is not filed in accordance with the terms of this Order, a recommendation will 26 be made that the entire action be dismissed.” Id. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s orders, 27 nor taken any action to prosecute this case. 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 2 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 3 Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 6 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 7 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 8 Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 9 fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections 10 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 11 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 Dated: February 6, 2019 13 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 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.