Phelps v. Superior Court of California County of Solano et al

Filing 5

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, recommending that action be dismissed without prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 3/17/2015. These Findings and Recommendations are SUBMITTED to District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.. Within 14 day after being served with these F & Rs, plaintiff may file written Objections with Court. (Marciel, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JANET DENISE PHELPS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. No. 2:14-cv-2794 MCE GGH PS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS STATE OF CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY OF SOLANO, et al., Defendants. 16 By order filed February 2, 2015, the court granted plaintiff twenty-eight days to file an 17 18 amended complaint. In the February 2nd order, the court informed plaintiff of the deficiencies in 19 the complaint. The twenty-eight day period expired, and plaintiff did not file an amended 20 complaint or otherwise respond to the court’s order. Accordingly, for the reasons given in the February 2, 2015, order, and for plaintiff’s 21 22 failure to present an amended complaint curing the defects of the original complaint as explained 23 therein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 24 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).1 25 1 26 27 28 The court has given consideration to plaintiff’s status as a pro se litigant. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992). The court has explained the defects in plaintiff’s complaint and advised plaintiff that failures to correct them might result in dismissal. Delay is nearly always prejudicial to defendants. On the other hand, dismissal precludes adjudicating the merits of plaintiff’s action. However, the court has considered less drastic sanctions, by issuing its order explaining the defects in the complaint. Plaintiff’s failure to cure the complaint’s defects leaves 1 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 3 (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 4 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 5 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections 6 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 7 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 9 Dated: March 17, 2015 10 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 GGH:076/ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the court no choice. The court’s need to manage its docket does not permit further devotion of scarce resources to the matter. See Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 131-32 n.1 (9th Cir.1987). 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?