Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-02631/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-02631-2/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 

RAM RAMSING, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:17-cv-2631-MCE-EFB PS 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment against defendant Sacramento Superior 

Court, but he failed to notice the motion for hearing as required by the court’s local rules. ECF 

No. 16; see E.D. L.R. Cal. 230(b). Accordingly, he was ordered to contact chambers to obtain 

available civil law and motion hearing dates. After he failed to comply with that order, plaintiff’s 

defectively filed motion for default judgment was denied without prejudice, and he was ordered 

to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to comply with the court’s 

order. ECF No. 18. 

 In response, plaintiff argued that this case should not be dismissed. ECF No. 19. But he 

did not provide any explanation as to why sanctions should not be imposed. Nor did he take any 

action to prosecute this case. Accordingly, plaintiff was then ordered to show cause, by no later 

than February 21, 2020, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or 

failure to comply with court orders. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff was also admonished that failure to 

Case 2:17-cv-02631-MCE-EFB Document 21 Filed 02/28/20 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 

comply with that order could result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of 

prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders. Id. 

 That deadline has passed, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order to show 

cause. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute and to comply with court orders. 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, 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: February 27, 2020. 

 

 

 

 

Case 2:17-cv-02631-MCE-EFB Document 21 Filed 02/28/20 Page 2 of 2