Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01590/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01590-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jeff Macomber
Defendant
Hoang Troung
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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 

HOANG TROUNG, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JEFF MACOMBER, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:14-cv-1590-EFB P 

ORDER 

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

U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to plaintiff’s consent. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4). 

 On April 28, 2015, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A. ECF No. 7. That order dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend, explained 

the deficiencies in the complaint and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint 

would result in this action being dismissed for failure to prosecute. 

The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not submitted an amended complaint or 

otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:14-cv-01590-EFB Document 8 Filed 06/02/15 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

 A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for 

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 

inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or 

without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. 

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in 

dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended 

complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 

1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule 

regarding notice of change of address affirmed). 

 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED. Fed. R. Civ. P. 

41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110, 183(b). 

Dated: June 2, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-01590-EFB Document 8 Filed 06/02/15 Page 2 of 2