From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Casey v. Haddad

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Mar 6, 2023
1:21-cv-00855-ADA=SKO (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2023)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00855-ADA=SKO (PC)

03-06-2023

DOMINIQUE ZAFIR CASEY, Plaintiff, v. HADDAD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO OBEY COURT ORDERS AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE (DOC. 22)

SHEILA K. OBERTO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Dominique Zafir Casey is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 12, 2023, the Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 19.) The Court determined Plaintiff had failed to state a cognizable claim against any named defendant. (Id. at 610.) Plaintiff was afforded 21 days within which to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the order, or, alternatively, to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 10.)

On January 30, 2023, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Refering [sic] to FIRST SCREENING ORDER.” (Doc. 20.)

On February 2, 2023, the Court issued an “Order to Show Cause In Writing Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed For Failure to Obey Court Order” (OSC). (Doc. 21.) Plaintiff was advised his January 30, 2023 filing did not comply with the screening order because it was neither a first amended complaint, complete in and of itself, nor a voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 2-3.) Plaintiff was afforded 21 days within which to explain, in writing, his failure to file either a first amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal, or, alternatively, to file the first amended complaint or voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 3.)

On March 3, 2022, this Court issued its “Findings and Recommendations to Dismiss Action for Failure to Obey Court orders and Failure to Prosecute.” (Doc. 22.) That same date, but after the Findings and Recommendations had issued, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC). (Doc. 23.)

The Court received the First Amended Complaint on March 3, 2023, although Plaintiff signed and dated the pleading on February 18, 2023.

II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff complied with this Court's OSC by filing his FAC, despite the delay between his signing the FAC on February 18, 2023, and the Court's receipt of the FAC on March 3, 2023. Because Plaintiff complied with the OSC by forwarding his FAC within 21 days of service of the OSC, the Findings and Recommendations issued March 3, 2023, are HEREBY VACATED.

Plaintiff is advised his First Amended Complaint will be screened in due course.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Casey v. Haddad

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Mar 6, 2023
1:21-cv-00855-ADA=SKO (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2023)
Case details for

Casey v. Haddad

Case Details

Full title:DOMINIQUE ZAFIR CASEY, Plaintiff, v. HADDAD, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Mar 6, 2023

Citations

1:21-cv-00855-ADA=SKO (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2023)