Pierce v. Chanelo et al

Filing 6

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Dismissing This Action, Without Prejudice, for Failure to Obey a Court Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/8/2013, referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Fourteen Days. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

SEAN WAYNE PIERCE,

11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:13-cv-00376-LJO-DLB PC
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING DISMISSING THIS
ACTION, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, FOR
FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER

P. CHANELO, et al.,
(ECF No. 4.)

14

Defendants.
FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE

15
16

Plaintiff Sean Wayne Pierce (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in

17

this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 20, 2013, the Court issued an order for

18

Plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $350.00 filing fee within

19

forty-five days. (ECF No. 3.) On May 24, 2013, the Court issued an order to show cause as to why

20

this action should not be dismissed. (ECF No. 4.) The Court forewarned Plaintiff that the failure to

21

respond would result in the dismissal of this action.

22

responded. Local Rule 110 provides that “failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Local

23

Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all

24

sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.”

25
26

As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not

Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff this action be dismissed for
failure to obey a court order.

27

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge

28

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days
1

1

after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections

2

with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

3

Recommendations.”

4

waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

Dated:

/s/ Dennis L. Beck

October 8, 2013

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
D C_Si gnat ur e- EN :
EA
D

3b142a

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2