Ruiz v. Curry
Filing
12
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this Action is DISMISSED for Failure to State a Cognizable Claim for Relief re 1 Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/20/2018. Referred to Judge Drozd. Objections to F&R due within fourteen (14) days. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ROGELIO MAY RUIZ,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
v.
J. CURRY,
Defendant.
16
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:17-cv-01454-DAD-SAB (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION
FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE
CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[ECF No. 11]
Plaintiff Rogelio May Ruiz is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On January 10, 2018, the Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a cognizable
20
claim for relief, and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Plaintiff
21
was warned that if he failed to comply, the Court would recommend that the action be dismissed for
22
failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. More than thirty days have passed, and Plaintiff has not
23
complied with or otherwise responded to the order.
24
The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power,
25
impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles Cnty.,
26
216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000). In determining whether to dismiss an action, the Court must weigh
27
“(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its
28
docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases
1
1
on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.” In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA)
2
Prod. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
3
These factors guide a court in deciding what to do, and are not conditions that must be met in order for
4
a court to take action. Id. (citation omitted).
5
Based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with or otherwise respond to the Court’s order, the Court
6
is left with no alternative but to recommend dismissal of the action. Id. This action can proceed no
7
further without Plaintiff’s cooperation and compliance with the order at issue, and the action cannot
8
simply remain idle on the Court’s docket, unprosecuted. Id. Accordingly, this action is HEREBY
9
RECOMMENDED that this action is dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief.
This Findings and Recommendation will be submitted to the United States District Judge
10
11
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days
12
after being served with this Findings and Recommendation, Plaintiff may file written objections with
13
the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and
14
Recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may
15
result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)
16
(citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
Dated:
20
February 20, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?