Gavin v. Target Corporation, Inc.

Filing 6

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 10/9/2014 VACATING the 10/15/2014 hearing and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed pursuant to FRCP 41(b) for failure to prosecute this action and failure to comply with this court's orders and local rules and that the clerk be directed to close this case. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Donati, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LYNN GAVIN, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:13-cv-2005-MCE-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TARGET CORPORATION, INC.; and DOES 1-100, Defendants. 16 17 18 On May 21, 2014, the court granted plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis, 19 directed the clerk to provide plaintiff with the forms required to effect service on defendant, and 20 directed plaintiff to provide to the U.S. Marshal within fourteen days all information needed to 21 effect service of process and to file a statement with the court within fourteen days thereafter that 22 the documents were submitted. ECF No. 3.1 Also on May 21, 2014, the court issued an order 23 which, among other things, set a status (pretrial scheduling) conference for October 15, 2014, 24 directed plaintiff to serve a copy of the order concurrently with service of process, and directed 25 the parties to file status reports within fourteen days of the October 15, 2014 conference, or in this 26 instance, by October 1, 2014. ECF No. 5. 27 28 1 This case is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 639(b)(1). 1 1 The docket reveals that plaintiff has not filed a statement that the service documents were 2 submitted to the Marshal, and the Marshal indicated on October 7, 2014, that he has not received 3 the service documents from plaintiff. Additionally, plaintiff did not file a status report, as 4 required by the May 21, 2014, order. Therefore, the court will vacate the status (pretrial 5 scheduling) conference and will recommend that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 6 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with 7 these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and 8 all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.”); see also 9 E.D. Cal. L.R. 183 (“Any individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound 10 by the Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure and by these Local Rules.”); Ghazali v. 11 Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper 12 ground for dismissal.”). 13 14 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference currently scheduled for October 15, 2014, is vacated. 15 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that: 16 1. This action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), based on 17 plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the action and failure to comply with this court’s orders and Local 18 Rules; and 19 2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case. 20 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 21 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 22 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 23 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 24 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 2 1 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 2 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 DATED: October 9, 2014. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 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?