(PS) Petrashov v. Colusa County Police, No. 2:2018cv00191 - Document 5 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/30/18 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. F&R referred to District Judge John A. Mendez. Objections to F&R due within twenty-one (21) days. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
(PS) Petrashov v. Colusa County Police Doc. 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 OLEG S. PETRASHOV, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:18-cv-0191 JAM AC PS v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS COLUSA COUNTY POLICE, 15 Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 17 18 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On April 11, 2018, the court dismissed the complaint, and granted plaintiff 30 days to file 19 20 an amended complaint. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to do so could lead to a 21 recommendation that the action be dismissed. Plaintiff did not respond. On May 15, 2018 the 22 court issued an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to 23 prosecute. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff has not respond to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to 24 prosecute this case. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 25 26 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 27 Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one (21) 3 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 4 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 5 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 6 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 7 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 DATED: May 30, 2018 9 10 11 12 13 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.