Roseberry v. Ramirez et al
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/26/2017 DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Hunt, G)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOHN ROSEBERRY,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:16-cv-0766-CMK
vs.
ORDER
R. RAMIREZ, et al.
15
Defendant.
16
/
17
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42
18
U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
19
636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action.
20
The court issued an order to show cause on July 7, 2017, requiring plaintiff to
21
show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to file an amended complaint.
22
Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this
23
action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule
24
110. To date, plaintiff has not filed a response to the order to show cause or an amended
25
complaint.
26
///
1
1
2
The undersigned therefore finds it appropriate to dismiss this action for plaintiff’s
failure to comply to court orders, and failure to file an amended complaint.
3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1.
This action is dismissed without prejudice; and
5
2.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
6
7
8
9
DATED: October 26, 2017
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?