Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-02031/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-02031-7/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

DWAIN ALAN PETERS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHERMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

1:13-cv-02031-LJO-JLT (PC) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO 

DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE FOR 

PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO COMPLY 

WITH THE COURT'S ORDER AND 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION

(Docs. 31, 34, 35)

30-DAY DEADLINE

On September 4, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this action should 

not be dismissed because of his failure to comply with the Court’s order. Notably, the Court

warned Plaintiff that his failure to respond would result in dismissal of this action. (Id.) The 

deadline has passed and Plaintiff has failed to respond.

1

 

The Local Rules, corresponding with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, provide, “[f]ailure of counsel, or 

of a party to comply with . . . any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the 

Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. 

“District courts have inherent power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that power, a 

 

1 The Court notes that the U.S. Postal Service has returned mail sent to Plaintiff as undeliverable. (See entries for 

September 2, 2015 and September 25, 2015.) The Court notified Plaintiff in the First Informational Order that he 

must keep the Court informed of his current address and that his failure to do so within 63 days of receipt of returned 

mail by the Court would result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute. Local Rule 183(b). (See Doc. 4.) 

This same order notified Plaintiff that service of documents at the address of record would be deemed sufficiently 

served when he has failed to provide the Court with an updated address. 

Case 1:13-cv-02031-LJO-JLT Document 36 Filed 10/23/15 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

court may impose sanctions, including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Authority of 

Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action with prejudice, 

based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action or failure to obey a court order, or failure to 

comply with local rules. See, e.g. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) 

(dismissal for failure to comply with an order requiring amendment of complaint); Malone v. U.S. 

Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with a court 

order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure to 

prosecute and to comply with local rules).

Based on Plaintiff=s failure to comply with or otherwise respond to the OSC, there is no 

alternative but to dismiss the action for his failure to respond to/obey a court order and for failure 

to prosecute. Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, with 

prejudice, for Plaintiff's failure both to obey a court order and to prosecute this action. 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1997e (a).

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 30

days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 

specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 

839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 22, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-02031-LJO-JLT Document 36 Filed 10/23/15 Page 2 of 2