Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01209/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01209-5/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

KIM DAVIS MCADOO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-03-1209 FCD KJM P

vs.

ED ALAMEDA, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

On April 5, 2006, defendants Hahn, Castro and Alameda filed a motion to dismiss

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). Plaintiff has not responded to the motion. Local

Rule 78-230(m) requires that plaintiff file an opposition to a motion to dismiss or a statement of

non-opposition. On January 10, 2006, plaintiff was advised generally that all motions to dismiss

must be briefed according to Local Rule 78-230(m). 

Good cause appearing, plaintiff will be granted thirty days within which to file an

opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ April 5, 2006 motion to dismiss. 

Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to adhere to the orders and local rules of

this court.

/////

Case 2:03-cv-01209-FCD-KJM Document 24 Filed 08/07/06 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

2

Also, on April 12, 2006, the court ordered plaintiff to complete documents

necessary for service of process on defendant Sandberg. Plaintiff was instructed to return the

documents to the court within sixty days. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order. 

Because this action cannot proceed against Sandberg without Sandberg having been served with

process, the court will recommend that Sandberg be dismissed without prejudice under Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within twenty

days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to

defendant Hahn, Castro and Alameda’s April 5, 2006 motion to dismiss or a statement of nonopposition; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Sandberg be dismissed without

prejudice. 

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 twenty

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.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are 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: August 4, 2006.

1

saif2215.46

Case 2:03-cv-01209-FCD-KJM Document 24 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 2