(PC) Perry v. United States Penitentiary Atwater
Filing
21
ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge; FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to Dismiss Action re 15 Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/2/2021. Referred to Unassigned DJ; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Rivera, O)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GARETH PERRY,
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY,
ATWATER,
15
Case No. 1:20-cv-00279-SKO (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO DISMISS ACTION
14-DAY DEADLINE
Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge
Defendant.
16
17
On March 8, 2021, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that
18
it fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted. (Doc. 18.) The Court granted Plaintiff leave
19
to amend his pleading within 21 days. (Id. at 8.) Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or
20
otherwise respond to the Court’s screening order. Therefore, on April 22, 2021, the Court ordered
21
Plaintiff to show cause, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to
22
comply with a court order. (Doc. 19.) Although more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff
23
has not responded to the order to show cause.
24
The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide that
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 mistakenly or
8
intentionally is inconsequential. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to comply with the Court’s orders.
9
The Court declines to expend its limited resources on a case that Plaintiff has chosen to ignore.
10
Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED for
11
failure to obey court orders and for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The
12
Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this action.
13
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District
14
Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of the date of
15
service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the
16
Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and
17
Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file objections within the specified time may result in
18
waiver of his rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing
19
Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
20
21
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
June 2, 2021
/s/
Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?