Hughes v. Vance et al

Filing 16

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 06/02/15 recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim and for failure to prosecute. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JASON SHAWN HUGHES,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-1550-KJM-EFB P

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

DESIREE VANCE, TJ GRUNDY, and
COUNTY OF BUTTE,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This
proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

20

On March 31, 2015, the court screened plaintiff’s original complaint. The complaint was

21

dismissed with leave to amend. ECF No. 13. That order informed plaintiff of the deficiencies in

22

his complaint and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Id. The

23

court also warned plaintiff that failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation

24

that this action be dismissed. Id. The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not filed an

25

amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1

26
27
28

1

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff
was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current
address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of
the party is fully effective.
1

1

A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for

2

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the

3

inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or

4

without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v.

5

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in

6

dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended

7

complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439,

8

1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule

9

regarding notice of change of address affirmed).

10

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED for failure to

11

state a claim and for failure to prosecute. 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal.

12

Local Rule 110.

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

18

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The

19

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

20

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez

21

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

22

Dated: June 2, 2015.

23
24
25
26
27
28
2