(PS) Lorretz et al v. California@GALoan450D002 et al, No. 2:2018cv02666 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/22/2018 ORDERING Motions 3 , 5 , 6 , 8 and 9 are DENIED, as the court lacks jurisdiction over this matter. RECOMMENDING that that this action be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Also ORDERING that all pleading, discovery, and motion practice in this action are STAYED pending resolution of the findings and recommendations. With the exception of objections to the findings and recommendations and any non-frivo lous motions for emergency relief, the court will not entertain or respond to any motions and other filings until the findings and recommendations are resolved. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations.(Washington, S)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DIANA LEE WALLACH LORRETZ, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:18-cv-02666 JAM CKD (PS) Plaintiffs, v. ORDER AND CALIFORNIA@GALoan45D002, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c). On October 3, 2018, the undersigned issued an order to show cause no later than October 20 17, 2018 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff was advised 21 that failure to allege a proper basis for jurisdiction would result in a recommendation that this 22 action be dismissed. The deadline has passed, and while plaintiff has filed numerous motions, 23 she has not shown cause why this action should not be dismissed. 24 25 26 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all pending motions (ECF Nos. 3, 5, 6, 8 & 9) are denied, as the court lacks jurisdiction over this matter. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 28 1 1 In light of these recommendations, IT IS ALSO HEREBY ORDERED that all pleading, 2 discovery, and motion practice in this action are STAYED pending resolution of the findings and 3 recommendations. With the exception of objections to the findings and recommendations and 4 any non-frivolous motions for emergency relief, the court will not entertain or respond to any 5 motions and other filings until the findings and recommendations are resolved. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 8 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 9 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 10 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 11 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 12 Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 Dated: October 22, 2018 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 2/lorretz2666.f&rs_nojuris 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.
