Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00167/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00167-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

LIUDMYLA IEGOROVA,

Plaintiff,

v.

LANA TSARICATI,

Defendant.

No. 2:19-cv-0167 JAM DB PS

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff Liudmyla Iegorova is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred 

to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By 

order signed October 3, 2019, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted leave 

to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff 

was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was 

specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner would 

result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The twenty-eight day period has 

expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order in any manner.

Although it appears from the docket that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned as 

undeliverable, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court 

apprised of plaintiff’s current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of 

documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

Case 2:19-cv-00167-JAM-DB Document 5 Filed 01/06/20 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

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

These findings and recommendations will be 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, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “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. See Martinez v. Ylst, 

951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: January 3, 2020

DLB:6

DB/orders/orders.pro se/iegorova0167.fta.f&rs

Case 2:19-cv-00167-JAM-DB Document 5 Filed 01/06/20 Page 2 of 2