Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02912/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02912-16/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES CHATMAN,

Plaintiff, No. 2:06-cv-2912 LKK EFB P

vs.

TOM FELKER, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

U.S.C. § 1983. On August 1, 2012, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment and

informed plaintiff of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 56; Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998). On October 4, 2012,

plaintiff requested a fourteen-day extension of time to file his opposition. Plaintiff explained

that his opposition was completed, but he needed additional time to obtain copies through the

law library. On the same day, the court granted plaintiff twenty-one days to file an opposition or

statement of non-opposition and warned him that failure to do so could result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). On October 23, 2012

plaintiff filed a “status report.” He stated that he needed a few more weeks to retrieve his

property and make copies of his opposition brief. Nearly a month has passed and plaintiff has

1

Case 2:06-cv-02912-RCJ Document 87 Filed 11/19/12 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

not filed his opposition or requested additional time to do so. Plaintiff has been warned that he

must file a response to defendants’ motion. Plaintiff has disobeyed this court’s orders and failed

to prosecute this action. The appropriate action is dismissal without prejudice.

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110, 183(b).

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: November 19, 2012. 

2

Case 2:06-cv-02912-RCJ Document 87 Filed 11/19/12 Page 2 of 2