From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilhelm v. Beard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 18, 2020
No. 2:18-cv-1125 DB P (E.D. Cal. May. 18, 2020)

Opinion

No. 2:18-cv-1125 DB P

05-18-2020

STEVE WILHELM, A.K.A. STEVEN HAIRL WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On February 11, 2020, having screened the instant complaint, the undersigned determined that plaintiff had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Consequently, he was ordered to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (See ECF No. 9). Thereafter, thirty days passed, and plaintiff neither filed an amended complaint nor responded to the court's order in any way.

As a result of plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's order, on April 7, 2020, the court issued an order directing plaintiff to show cause within thirty days why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order. (See ECF No. 12). To date, plaintiff has also failed either to file a showing of cause or to respond to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly appoint a District Court Judge to this action.

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim, for failure to prosecute, and for failure to obey court orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 110; see also ECF Nos. 9, 12.

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 thirty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: May 18, 2020

/s/_________

DEBORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DLB:13
DB/ORDERS/ORDERS.PRISONER.CIVIL RIGHTS/wilh1125.noshow.of&r


Summaries of

Wilhelm v. Beard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 18, 2020
No. 2:18-cv-1125 DB P (E.D. Cal. May. 18, 2020)
Case details for

Wilhelm v. Beard

Case Details

Full title:STEVE WILHELM, A.K.A. STEVEN HAIRL WILHELM, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY A…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: May 18, 2020

Citations

No. 2:18-cv-1125 DB P (E.D. Cal. May. 18, 2020)