Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00434/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00434-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BRIAN HOGUE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SACRAMENTO POLICE 

DEPARTMENT, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:17-cv-0434-MCE-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 On January 7, 2020, the City of Sacramento filed a motion to compel, ECF No. 

25, and on February 5, 2020, the City of Sacramento filed a motion to compel deposition or for 

terminating sanctions, ECF No. 26. The time for acting passed, and plaintiff failed to file an 

opposition or otherwise respond to either motion. 

On February 14, 2020, and March 6, 2020, the court warned plaintiff that failure to 

respond to the motions could result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 41(b). The court also granted plaintiff a 21-day extension of time to respond to each 

motion. ECF Nos. 27, 28. 

The time for acting has once again passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition, a 

statement of no opposition, or otherwise responded to either of the court’s order. Plaintiff has 

Case 2:17-cv-00434-MCE-EFB Document 29 Filed 04/07/20 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2 

disobeyed this court’s orders and failed to prosecute this action. The appropriate action is 

dismissal without prejudice. 

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. 

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)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: April 6, 2020. 

Case 2:17-cv-00434-MCE-EFB Document 29 Filed 04/07/20 Page 2 of 2