Randy

(PC) Poarch v. Randy

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 14, 20202:20-cv-01191California498 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GREGORY ROOSEVELT POARCH, Case No. 2:20-cv-01191-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR

v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO

COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS, AND

LENICK RANDY, et al. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN

DAYS

18 On September 3, 2020, the previously assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint, found that it failed to state a claim, and granted plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 20. Rather than filing an amended complaint, plaintiff subsequently filed four one-page documents that are largely unintelligible. ECF No. 21-23, 25. On October 22, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to show cause within thirty days why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 26. Plaintiff was warned that failure to respond to the court’s order could…

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.