Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00519/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00519-5/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANK SISNEROZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

WHITMAN, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 05 00519 AWI LJO P

ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS ISSUED MAY 30,

2006. (Doc. 25.) 

 Frank Sisneroz (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Plaintiff filed the instant action on April 20, 2005. On August 4, 2005, this Court issued

an Order severing Plaintiff’s claims as they were contained in a Complaint with numerous

Plaintiff’s. Plaintiff was also ordered to file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of

service of the Order. 

On August 30, 2005, Plaintiff filed a pleading titled “Motion of Response and Objection

to Magistrate Order.” The District Court denied the Motion as a Motion for Reconsideration and

denied the request. 

On March 15, 2006, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be

Case 1:05-cv-00519-AWI-GSA Document 28 Filed 06/19/06 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

27

28

2

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to file an Amended Complaint. Plaintiff responded to the Order

on April 11, 2006, saying he did not believe he needed to file an Amended Complaint. On April

13, 2006, the Court discharged the Order to Show Cause, and issued an Order dismissing the

Complaint with leave to amend. However, Plaintiff did not submit an Amended Complaint

within the allotted time frame. Thus, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to

dismiss the action for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute on May 30, 2005. Plaintiff did, however,

file an untimely Amended Complaint as well as Objections to the Findings and

Recommendations. Given Plaintiff’s belated compliance in submitting the Amended Complaint,

the Court will vacate the Findings and Recommendations and proceed with the case. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued May 30, 2006, are VACATED (Doc.

25.) 

The Court will proceed with its screening of the case in due course. Plaintiff should keep

the Court apprised of his current address so as to receive all documents issued or filed relating to

his case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00519-AWI-GSA Document 28 Filed 06/19/06 Page 2 of 2