Newsom

(PC) Montecastro v. Newsom

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 4, 20201:20-cv-00689California5,986 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 HENDRIX MORENO MONTECASTRO, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00689-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO

THIS ACTION

14 NEWSOM, et al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION ) FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO 16 ) COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER, AND ) FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM 17 ) FOR RELIEF ) 18 ) (ECF Nos. 6, 7)

19 Plaintiff Hendrix Moreno Montecastro is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 20 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 21 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 I. 23 BACKGROUND 24 Plaintiff filed the instant action on May 18, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) 25 On August…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.