From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hanna v. Ammerman

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 1, 2022
2:21-CV-2240-DAD-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-CV-2240-DAD-DMC-P

11-01-2022

STEVEN M. HANNA, Plaintiff, v. AMMERMAN, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendants' unopposed motion to dismiss, ECF No. 18.

In their motion, Defendants argue that this action must be dismissed without leave:o amend because Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under the First Amendment or Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. See id. After Plaintiff failed to file an opposition to Defendants' motion within the time provided under the ocal rules, the Court issued a minute order on September 15, 2022, advising Plaintiff that failure:o file an opposition could be construed as consent to the relief requested pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 230(c), (1). See ECF No. 21. The minute order provided Plaintiff an additional 30 days within which to file an opposition. See id. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition and the Court now construes Plaintiff's failure to do so as consent to the relief requested in Defendants' motion.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that Defendants' unopposed motion to dismiss, ECF No. 18, be granted and that this action be dismissed without leave to amend.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Hanna v. Ammerman

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 1, 2022
2:21-CV-2240-DAD-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)
Case details for

Hanna v. Ammerman

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN M. HANNA, Plaintiff, v. AMMERMAN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 1, 2022

Citations

2:21-CV-2240-DAD-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)