(PS) Morgan et al v. Wong et al, No. 2:2021cv00747 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 05/24/23 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the 7 01/23/23 Order. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&Rs due within 14 days. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
(PS) Morgan et al v. Wong et al Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WIENDI MORGAN, 12 Case No. 2:21-cv-00747-TLN-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 K. WONG, et al., 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 On January 23, 2023, I screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint, notified her that it 17 18 failed state a claim, and granted her thirty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 7. 19 Plaintiff failed to timely file an amended complaint. Accordingly, on April 10, 2023, I ordered 20 her to show cause within fourteen days why this action should not be dismissed for failure to 21 prosecute and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 8. I notified her that if she wished to continue 22 with this lawsuit, she must file an amended complaint. I also warned plaintiff that failure to 23 comply with the April 10 order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.1 24 Id. 25 26 27 1 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the April 10, 2023 order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 The deadline has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the April 10, 2023 order. Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 3 4 1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the January 23, 2023 order. 5 2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 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, any party may file written 9 objections 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.” Any response to the 11 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 12 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 13 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 14 v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: May 24, 2023 18 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.