Hernandez v. City of Stockton et al
Filing
41
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/12/2019 VACATING that the 12/18/2019 scheduling conference; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute andto comply with court orders. Referred to John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DANIEL HERNANDEZ,
12
13
No. 2:18-cv-1316-JAM-EFB PS
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
14
CITY OF STOCKTON, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
After this case was referred to the undersigned, the court issued an order setting a status
18
conference on November 20, 2019. ECF No. 37. The order also directed the parties to file, by no
19
later than November 6, 2019, status reports addressing the future scheduling of the case. Id.
20
Defendants timely filed a joint status report (ECF No. 39), but plaintiff failed to file a status
21
report. Accordingly, the status conference was continued, and plaintiff was ordered, by no later
22
than December 4, 2019, to file a status report and to show cause why sanctions should not be
23
imposed for his failure to file a status report. ECF No. 40. Plaintiff was also admonished that
24
failure to comply with the order could result in the imposition of sanctions, including a
25
recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with court
26
orders. Id. at 2.
27
28
The deadline has passed and plaintiff has not filed a status report, nor has he otherwise
responded to the court’s order to show cause.
1
1
2
3
4
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the December 18, 2019 scheduling conference
is vacated.
Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and
to comply with court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Cal. E.D. L.R. 110.
5
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
6
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
7
after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections
8
with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings
9
and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right
10
to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998);
11
Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
12
13
DATED: December 12, 2019
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?