From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doe v. Chastan

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 18, 2009
No. CIV S-08-2091-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-2091-CMK-P.

August 18, 2009


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action.

On July 7, 2009, the court directed plaintiff to show cause within 30 days why this action should not be dismissed. The court stated:

. . . On February 17, 2009, the court directed plaintiff to file a first amended complaint within 30 days and warned plaintiff that the failure to comply could result in dismissal of this action. As of April 14, 2009, plaintiff had not complied and the court directed plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. On April 30, 2009, plaintiff responded by seeking additional time. For good cause shown, the order to show cause was discharged on May 5, 2009, and plaintiff was granted an additional 45 days to file an amended complaint. To date, plaintiff has not complied.
* * *
Having considered these factors, and in light of plaintiff's failure to resolve the fee status for this case as directed, the court finds that dismissal of this action is appropriate.
Based on the foregoing, plaintiff shall show cause in writing, within 30 days of the date of this order, why this action should not be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

More than 30 days have passed and plaintiff has not responded to the latest order to show cause nor has plaintiff otherwise complied with the court's prior orders.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is, therefore, dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file.


Summaries of

Doe v. Chastan

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 18, 2009
No. CIV S-08-2091-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009)
Case details for

Doe v. Chastan

Case Details

Full title:JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. CHASTAN, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Aug 18, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-08-2091-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009)