Paez, Jr. v. Fresno County Sheriff's Department
Filing
11
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding Dismissal of Action for Failure to Prosecute re 1 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 3/5/18. Case Assigned to Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill and Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. New Case No. is: 1:17-cv-0455-LJO-BAM. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Fourteen Days. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GUILLERMO G. PAEZ, JR.,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
Case No. 1:17-cv-00455-BAM (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
v.
FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT,
FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE
Defendant.
16
Findings and Recommendations
17
18
I.
Background
19
Plaintiff Guillermo G. Paez, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) filed this action while housed at the Fresno
20
County Jail and is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42
21
U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this action on March 30, 2017. (ECF No. 1.) This matter was
22
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
23
302.
On November 29, 2017, the Court issued a screening order granting Plaintiff leave to file
24
25
an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 10.) On December 15, 2017, the
26
Court’s screening order was returned as “Undeliverable, Not in Custody.” Plaintiff has not filed
27
an amended complaint, a notice of change of address, or otherwise communicated with the Court.
28
///
1
1
II.
2
Plaintiff is required to keep the Court apprised of his current address at all times. Local
3
Discussion
Rule 183(b) provides:
4
7
Address Changes. A party appearing in propria persona shall keep the Court and
opposing parties advised as to his or her current address. If mail directed to a
plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S. Postal Service,
and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixtythree (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action
without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
8
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) also provides for dismissal of an action for failure to
9
prosecute.1
5
6
10
According to the Court’s docket, Plaintiff’s address change was due no later than
11
February 23, 2018. Plaintiff has failed to file a change of address and he has not otherwise been
12
in contact with the Court. “In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution,
13
the district court is required to weigh several factors: (1) the public’s interest in expeditious
14
resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the
15
defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the
16
availability of less drastic sanctions.” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988)
17
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Omstead v. Dell, Inc., 594 F.3d 1081,
18
1084 (9th Cir. 2010); In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability Litigation, 460 F.3d
19
1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006). These factors guide a court in deciding what to do, and are not
20
conditions that must be met in order for a court to take action. In re PPA, 460 F.3d at 1226
21
(citation omitted).
22
Given Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this Court’s order, the expeditious resolution of
23
litigation and the Court’s need to manage its docket weigh in favor of dismissal. Id. at 1227.
24
More importantly, given the Court’s apparent inability to communicate with Plaintiff, there are no
25
other reasonable alternatives available to address Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action and his
26
failure to apprise the Court of his current address. Id. at 1228–29; Carey, 856 F.2d at 1441. The
27
1
28
Courts may dismiss actions sua sponte under Rule 41(b) based on the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. Hells Canyon
Pres. Council v. U. S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted).
2
1
Court will therefore recommend that this action be dismissed based on Plaintiff’s failure to
2
prosecute this action.
3
III.
4
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to randomly assign a
5
6
Conclusion and Recommendation
district judge to this action.
Furthermore, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed, without
7
prejudice, based on Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 183(b).
8
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District
9
Judge assigned to the case, under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14)
10
days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written
11
objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s
12
Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the
13
specified time may result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual
14
findings” on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v.
15
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
16
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
March 5, 2018
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?