(PC) Bucaojit v. Solano County Sheriff's Department et al

Filing 41

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 5/7/2022 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to comply with the court's local rules; Defendants' 39 motion to dismiss be denied as moot; and the Clerk be directed to close the case. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDREW MICHAEL BUCAOJIT, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. SOLANO COUNTY, et al., 15 Case No. 2:19-cv-02055-WBS-JDP (PC) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS, AND FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL RULES Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 16 17 18 On January 10, 2022, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s third amended 19 complaint. ECF No. 39. In violation of Local Rule 230(l), plaintiff failed to timely file an 20 opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. Accordingly, on April 13, 21 2022, I ordered plaintiff to show cause within twenty-one days why this action should not be 22 dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the court’s local rules. ECF No. 23 40. I notified him that if he wished to continue this lawsuit, he needed to file, within twenty-one 24 days, an opposition or statement of non-opposition to respondent’s motion. Id. I also warned him 25 that failure to comply with the April 13 order would result in a recommendation that this action 26 be dismissed.1 Id. 27 28 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the April 13, 2022 order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at 1 1 1 2 The deadline has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of nonopposition to defendants’ motion nor otherwise responded to the April 13, 2022 order. 3 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 4 1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, 5 and failure to comply with the court’s local rules. 6 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 39, be denied as moot. 7 3. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 8 I submit these findings and recommendations to the district judge under 28 U.S.C. 9 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, 10 Eastern District of California. The parties may, within 14 days of the service of the findings and 11 recommendations, file written objections to the findings and recommendations with the court. 12 Such objections should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 13 Recommendations.” The district judge will review the findings and recommendations under 28 14 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: May 7, 2022 18 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the record address of the party is fully effective. 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?