Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02222/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02222-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Hawkins
Defendant
Bernard L. Smith
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 

BERNARD L. SMITH, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HAWKINS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-2222-KJM-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

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

U.S.C. § 1983. On July 28, 2015, defendant Hawkins filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state 

a claim and on the basis of qualified immunity. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). The time for acting 

passed, and plaintiff failed to file an opposition or otherwise respond to the motion. 

On August 31, 2015, the court warned plaintiff that failure to respond to the motion could 

result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The court 

also granted plaintiff a 21-day extension of time to respond. By order filed September 25, 2015, 

plaintiff was granted an additional extension of thirty days to file his opposition. 

The time for acting has once again passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition, a 

statement of no opposition, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Plaintiff has disobeyed 

this court’s orders and failed to prosecute this action. The appropriate action is dismissal without 

prejudice. 

Case 2:14-cv-02222-KJM-EFB Document 35 Filed 11/04/15 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

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 4, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-02222-KJM-EFB Document 35 Filed 11/04/15 Page 2 of 2