Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00050/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00050-5/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

JASON DONNELL WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0050 DFL JFM P

vs.

MULE CREEK STATE PRISON,

Facility “C” Administration of

Department of Corrections, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed October 14, 2005, this court directed plaintiff to file

a pretrial statement on or before June 23, 2006. In addition, by order filed June 16, 2006,

plaintiff was directed to serve a copy of his June 1, 2006 notice of change of address and

opposition to defendants’ March 22, 2006 motion for summary judgment on counsel for

defendants and to file within ten days a certificate of service attesting thereto. Plaintiff has filed

neither a pretrial statement nor a certificate of service attesting to compliance with the June 16,

2006 order. The court will therefore recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); Local Rule 11-110.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00050-DFL -JFM Document 45 Filed 08/15/06 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

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants are relieved from filing a pretrial statement.

2. The pretrial conference set for July 14, 2006 is vacated; 

3. The jury trial set for October 2, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable David

F. Levi is vacated; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); Local Rule 11-110.

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 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.” 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 14, 2006.

12

will0050..fpt

Case 2:04-cv-00050-DFL -JFM Document 45 Filed 08/15/06 Page 2 of 2