From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freitas v. Walker

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 22, 2010
No. CIV S-09-3328-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-09-3328-CMK-P.

July 22, 2010


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 June 2, 2010, the court issued an order providing Plaintiff an opportunity to show cause why defendant Walker should not be dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff was warned that failure to respond to this order may result in dismissal of the action for the reasons outlined above, as well as for failure to prosecute and comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 110. To date, Plaintiff has not complied. The court will therefore construe Plaintiff's lack of response as having no objection to the dismissal of defendant Walker from this action.

In addition, on June 2, 2010, the court found service appropriate for defendant DeLeon. Plaintiff was provided with the documents necessary for the U.S. Marshal to effect service. Plaintiff was ordered to complete and return, within 30 days, the USM-285 form, the summons, and two copies of the complaint. Plaintiff was informed that this action cannot proceed further until Plaintiff complies. Plaintiff was again warned that failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action. To date, Plaintiff has not complied.

Therefore, Plaintiff will be required to show cause in writing, within 30 days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to submit the required service documents. Plaintiff is again warned that failure to respond to this order may result in dismissal of the entire action for the reasons outlined above, as well as for failure to prosecute and comply with court rules and orders. See id.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant Walker is dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Walker as a defendant and update the docket; and

3. Plaintiff shall show cause in writing, within 30 days of the date of service of this order, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to submit the required service documents.


Summaries of

Freitas v. Walker

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 22, 2010
No. CIV S-09-3328-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2010)
Case details for

Freitas v. Walker

Case Details

Full title:DUSTIN FREITAS, Plaintiff, v. JAMES WALKER, et. al. Defendants

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

Date published: Jul 22, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-09-3328-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2010)