Nordtrom

(PC) Stricklen v. Nordtrom

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 20241:23-cv-00537California1,787 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARK EDWARD STRICKLEN, Case No.: 1:23-cv-00537-CDB Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS ACTION FOR PLAINTIFF’S

v. FAILURE TO OBEY COURT ORDERS AND

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

C. NORDTROM, 14-DAY DEADLINE Defendant. Clerk of the Court to Assign District Judge 16 Plaintiff Mark Edward Stricklen is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. I. BACKGROUND On December 7, 2023, Defendant Nordstrom filed an answer to Plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. 16.) Thereafter, on December 8, 2023, this Court issued its Order Referring Case to Post- Screening ADR and Staying Case for 90 Days. (See Doc. 18.) The parties were ordered to file “the attached notice, indicating their agreement to proceed to an early settlement conference or their belief that settlement is not achievable at this time” within 45 days of the date of the order. (Id. at 2.) The notice form was…

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.