(PC) Gaon v. Lau et al

Filing 13

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this action be DISMISSED for failure to obey court orders and for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted re 9 Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint; referred to Judge Unassigned DJ, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 11/18/2020. (Objections to F&R due within 14-Day Deadline)(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

AMOS GAON,

12
13

Case No. 1:20-cv-00182-JLT (PC)
Plaintiff,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO DISMISS ACTION

v.
14-DAY DEADLINE

14
15
16

T. LAU, et al.,
Defendants.

Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge

On August 27, 2020, the Court issued a screening order directing Plaintiff, within 21 days,

17

to file a second amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading. (Doc. 10.) Plaintiff

18

failed to file an amended complaint within the time provided. Therefore, on October 15, 2020, the

19

Court issued an order to show cause, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed.

20

(Doc. 11.) The Court cautioned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the order would “result in a

21

recommendation that this case be dismissed for failure to state a claim and to obey a court order.”

22

(Id. at 2.) Although more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff has failed to respond to the

23

order to show cause.

24

The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide,

25

“[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with … any order of the Court may be grounds for

26

the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court.”

27

Local Rule 110. “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets” and, in exercising

28

that power, may impose sanctions, including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Auth.,

1

City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action based on a

2

party’s failure to prosecute an action, obey a court order, or comply with local rules. See, e.g.,

3

Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with a

4

court order to amend a complaint); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir.

5

1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with a court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421,

6

1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure to prosecute and to comply with local rules).

7

It appears that Plaintiff has abandoned this action. Whether he has done so intentionally or

8

mistakenly is inconsequential. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to comply with the Court’s orders and

9

Local Rules. The Court declines to expend its limited resources on a case that Plaintiff has chosen

10
11

to ignore.
Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED for failure to

12

obey court orders and for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The Court

13

DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to his action.

14

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District

15

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

16

the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections

17

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

18

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file objections within the specified time may result

19

in waiver of his rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing

20

Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 18, 2020

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2