(PS) Nelson v. Shasta County Courts et al

Filing 6

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/5/2022 RECOMMENDING that this action be Dismissed for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Coll, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 FONTELLA FRANSCINE NELSON, 11 12 13 14 No. 2:22-cv-00347 TLN AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SHASTA COUNTY COURTS, et al., Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the 17 undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On March 15, 2022, 18 the court granted plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application but rejected the complaint, 19 granting plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff was cautioned that 20 failure to do so could lead to a recommendation that the action be dismissed. Plaintiff did not file 21 an amended complaint within the time limit. On April 20, 2022, the court issued an order to show 22 cause within 14 days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 5. 23 Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this case. 24 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 25 prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 26 Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 1 1 (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 2 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 3 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 4 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 5 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 DATED: May 5, 2022 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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?