Anderson

Anderson v. State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 20231:22-cv-01391California1,143 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MAYUMI ANDERSON, Case No. 1:22-cv-01391-JLT-EPG Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE

v. (ECF No. 2) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

Defendants. RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION BE

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE DUE

TO PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO COMPLY

WITH A COURT ORDER AND LOCAL

RULE 183(b) OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN

FOURTEEN (14) DAYS

19 Plaintiff Mayumi Anderson is proceeding pro se in this civil action filed on October 28, 2022, against the State of California, Judge Ernest J. LiCalsi, Attorney Thomas J. Holthus, McCarthy Holthus, LLP, and M&T Bank. (ECF No. 1). Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with a court order and Local Rule 183(b), both of which require a plaintiff to notify the Court of 23 the plaintiff’s current address, the Court will vacate the scheduling conference and recommend 24 that this…

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.