Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01263/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01263-4/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL UPCHURCH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-08-1263 MCE EFB P

vs.

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel seeking relief for alleged civil rights violations. 

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 2, 2009, defendants County of Sacramento and Sacramento

County Sheriff’s Department moved for summary judgment. Dckt. No. 25. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

56. On December 4, 2009, the court advised plaintiff of the requirements for opposing a motion

pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d

952, 957 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc), cert. denied, 527 U.S. 1035 (1999), and Klingele v.

Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988). That order also informed plaintiff of the

requirements for filing an opposition to the pending motion and that failure to oppose such a

motion might be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. Plaintiff failed to file an

opposition.

////

Case 2:08-cv-01263-MCE -EFB Document 31 Filed 03/10/10 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

1

 It appears from the docket that the February 1, 2010 order was not properly served on

plaintiff until February 10, 2010. 

2

On February 1, 2010, the court gave plaintiff 20 days to file an opposition or statement of

non-opposition and warned him that failure to do so could result in dismissal.1 See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 41(b). The 20 days have passed and plaintiff did not file an opposition or a statement of no

opposition.

Plaintiff has been warned that he must file a response to defendants’ motion. Plaintiff

has disobeyed this court’s orders. The appropriate sanction is dismissal without prejudice.

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

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: March 10, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01263-MCE -EFB Document 31 Filed 03/10/10 Page 2 of 2