(PS) Rigor v. California State University Sacramento et al, No. 2:2019cv00633 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/03/19 RECOMMENDING that that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&Rs due by within 21 days. (Benson, A.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Rigor v. California State University Sacramento et al Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SORAYA MARIA RIGOR, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. No. 2:19-cv-00633 KJM AC (PS) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 18 19 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On August 13, 2019, 20 the court rejected plaintiff’s first amended complaint on screening, granting plaintiff 30 days to 21 file a second amended complaint. ECF No. 6. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to file a second 22 amended complaint could lead to a recommendation that the action be dismissed. Plaintiff did 23 not file an amended complaint within the time limit. On September 17, 2019, the court issued an 24 order to show cause within 14 days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 25 ECF No. 7. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute 26 this case. 27 //// 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 this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 6 (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 7 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 8 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 9 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 DATED: October 3, 2019 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.
