Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-02182/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-02182-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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 

GREGORY STEVEN TREMAINE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

FEDERAL BUREAU OF 

INVESTIGATION, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:16-cv-2182-KJM-EFB PS 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Defendant filed a motion to dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(B)(6), and noticed the motion for hearing on November 2, 2016. ECF 

Nos. 4, 5. Plaintiff failed to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the 

motion. Accordingly, the hearing was continued to December 7, 2016, and plaintiff was ordered, 

by no later than November 23, 2016, to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the 

motion and to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to timely file an 

opposition or statement of non-opposition. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff was also admonished that failure 

to file an opposition would be deemed a statement of non-opposition to the granting of 

defendant’s motion, and could result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of 

prosecution and/or failure to comply with court orders and the court’s local rules. Id. 

///// 

Case 2:16-cv-02182-KJM-EFB Document 8 Filed 11/30/16 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

 The deadline has passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of nonopposition to the pending motion, nor has he responded to the court’s order to show cause. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the December 7, 2016 hearing on defendant’s 

motion to dismiss is vacated. 

 Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and 

to comply with court orders and the court’s local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Cal. E.D. L.R. 

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, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. 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: November 30, 2016. 

Case 2:16-cv-02182-KJM-EFB Document 8 Filed 11/30/16 Page 2 of 2