Gividen v. Fochesatto et al
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Judge enter an order DISMISSING this matter WITHOUT PREJUDICE; DENYING AS MOOT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc. 12 ); and DENYING AS MOOT Defendants' Request for Summary Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15 ). Any party may serve and file written objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bruce G Macdonald on 9/7/2017. (See attached for details) (DPS)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
JoAn Ada Gividen,
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Dr. Luciano Fochesatto, M.D., et al.
No. CV-17-00118-TUC-JGZ (BGM)
Currently pending before the Court is Defendants’ Request for Summary Ruling
on Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15). On July 17, 2017, the Defendants filed a Motion to
Dismiss (Doc. 12). On July 24, 2017, the Court issued a Stratton1 notice to Plaintiff
informing her that she had until August 28, 2017 to file her response. Order 7/24/2017
(Doc. 14). On that same date, the Court again warned Plaintiff that her failure to comply
with the provisions of the Order could result in dismissal of her claims. See id.
On or about August 18, 2017, Plaintiff left a voicemail with undersigned’s office
indicating that she had been ill and needed additional time; however, Plaintiff did not
indicate how much additional time, file such request with the Court, or call again.
Moreover, the Court does not accept telephonic requests. See LRCiv. 7.3.
Stratton v. Buck, 697 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2012).
In light of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s July 24, 2017 Order (Doc.
14), the Magistrate Judge recommends dismissal of this cause of action. See Ferdik v.
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action
for failure to comply with any order of the Court).
For the reasons delineated above, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the
District Judge enter an order:
DISMISSING this matter WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
DENYING AS MOOT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc.
DENYING AS MOOT Defendants’ Request for Summary Ruling on
Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b) and Rule 72(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, any party may serve and file written objections within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to
another party’s objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). If objections are not timely filed, they may be deemed waived. If
objections are filed, the parties should use the following case number: CV-17-0118-
Dated this 7th day of September, 2017.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?