(PS) Staar v. Goodwill Industries of Sacramento Valley & Northern Nevada, Inc., No. 2:2018cv02077 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/30/2018 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Huang, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Staar v. Goodwill Industries of Sacramento Valley & Northern Nevada, Inc. Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MONICA STAAR 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:18-cv-02077 JAM AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SACRAMENTO VALLEY & NORTHERN NEVADA, INC., Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 19 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On October 10, 2018, 20 the court denied plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application, and granted plaintiff 30 days to 21 file a renewed IFP application. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to do so could 22 lead to a recommendation that the action be dismissed. Plaintiff did not file a renewed IFP 23 application in proper form, or pay the filing fee. On November 15, 2018 the court issued an order 24 to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 5. 25 Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this case. 26 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 27 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 28 Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 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 3 (21) 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: November 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.
