Ohlendorf v. American Brokers Conduit et al

Filing 63

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/25/12 RECOMMENDING that this action re 2 Complaint filed by Craig E. Ohlendorf be dismissed without prejudice and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections to F&R due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Meuleman, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CRAIG E. OHLENDORF,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

2:11-cv-293-LKK-EFB PS

vs.
AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT,
a wholly owned subsidiary of AMERICAN
HOME MORTGAGE CORP.; POWER
DEFAULT SERVICES, INC., f/k/a AHMSI
DEFAULT SERVICES, INC.; AMERICAN
HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC.;
LSI TITLE COMPANY; T.D. SERVICE
COMPANY; OLD REPUBLIC TITLE
COMPANY; DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL
TRUST COMPANY; OPTION ONE
MORTGAGE CORPORATION; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
SYSTEMS, INC. (MERS); HARBORVIEW
MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST; MORTGAGE
LOAN PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2007-5; and DOES 1-10,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

21
Defendants.
22

/

23

This action, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona and in forma pauperis, is

24

before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28

25

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On May 9, 2012, the court issued an order (1) dismissing defendant Old

26

Republic Title Company without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of

1

1

Civil Procedure 41(b); (2) dismissing defendant American Brokers Conduit without prejudice for

2

failure to effect service of process within the time prescribed by Rule 4(m); and (3) providing

3

plaintiff until June 11, 2012 to file an amended complaint, as provided therein and as provided in

4

the court’s March 5 and April 17, 2012 orders. Dckt. No. 62 at 4. The dismissal order warned

5

plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this

6

action be dismissed. Id.

7
8
9
10

The deadline has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or
otherwise responded to the court’s May 9, 2012 order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without
prejudice, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 110.

11

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

12

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

13

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

14

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

15

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

16

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

17

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

18

Dated: June 25, 2012.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2