(PC)Carter

(PC)Carter v. Randolph

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20241:23-cv-01507California350 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RONALD CARTER, Case No. 1:23-cv-1507 JLT SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THIS

13 v. ACTION FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO

OBEY COURT ORDERS AND FAILURE TO

14 A. RANDOLPH, et al. PROSECUTE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK

OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE

15 Defendants. (Doc. 11) 16 17 Ronald Carter is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to obey court orders and failed to 19 prosecute the action after he failed to respond to the Court’s screening order in any way, 20 including by filing an amended complaint to cure the pleading defects identified by the Court. 21 (Doc. 11.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the action be dismissed. (Id. at 8.) 22 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that 23 any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 11 at 8.) The…

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.