Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-00150/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-00150-2/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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JEREMIAH HANKINS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:24-cv-0150 TLN SCR P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 

§1983. On screening the complaint, this court found plaintiff stated a potentially cognizable 

Fourteenth Amendment claim against defendant Williams but stated no other claims. (Nov. 5, 

2024 Order, ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff was given the option of proceeding immediately on his claim 

found cognizable or amending the complaint. Plaintiff was ordered to notify the court within 

thirty days of his choice. Plaintiff was warned that his failure to comply with the November 5 

order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

Thirty days have passed and plaintiff has not filed the required notice or otherwise 

responded to the court’s November 5 order. Accordingly, this court will recommend this action 

be dismissed without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders. See E.D. Cal. 

R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. 

//// 

Case 2:24-cv-00150-TLN-SCR Document 12 Filed 12/20/24 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 

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed 

without prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one 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 waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: December 19, 2024 

Case 2:24-cv-00150-TLN-SCR Document 12 Filed 12/20/24 Page 2 of 2