Baker v. City of Modesto

Full title: MICHAEL EVAN BAKER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MODESTO, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Apr 21, 2011

1:11-cv-00129-AWI-SMS (E.D. Cal. Apr. 21, 2011)

Opinion

MICHAEL EVAN BAKER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MODESTO, et al., Defendants. No. 1:11-cv-00129-AWI-SMS United States District Court, E.D. California. April 21, 2011

          FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE (Doc. 5)

          SANDRA M. SNYDER, Magistrate Judge.

         On February 11, 2011, this Court granted Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and authorized service of the complaint upon the defendants. The order provided that if Plaintiff failed to complete necessary documentation for service and return it to the Court within thirty days, the action would be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff has failed to complete and return the necessary documentation. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that this action be dismissed without prejudice as a result of Plaintiff's failure to prosecute the case.

         These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the Hon. Anthony W. Ishii, the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On or before May 4, 2011, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that, by failing to file objections within the specified time, he may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.