(PC) Williams v. CDCR Medical ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KYLE WILLIAMS, Case No. 1:20-cv-00807-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION 13 v. 14-DAY DEADLINE 14 CDCR MEDICAL, et al., Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee for this action. Therefore, on June 13, 2020, the Court 18 ordered Plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) or pay the filing fee 19 in full within 45 days. (Doc. 4.) Plaintiff failed to submit an IFP application or to pay the filing 20 fee with the provided time. Accordingly, on August 13, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show 21 cause, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court 22 order. (Doc. 9.) Although more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff has not responded to 23 the order to show cause. 24 The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide, 25 “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with … any order of the Court may be grounds for 26 the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court.” 27 Local Rule 110. “District courts have inherent power to control their dockets” and, in exercising that power, may impose sanctions, including dismissal of an action. Thompson v. Housing Auth., 1 City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action based on a 2 party’s failure to prosecute an action, obey a court order, or comply with local rules. See, e.g., 3 Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with a 4 court order to amend a complaint); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir. 5 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with a court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 6 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure to prosecute and to comply with local rules). 7 It appears that Plaintiff has abandoned this action. Whether he has done so mistakenly or 8 intentionally is inconsequential. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to comply with the Court’s orders. 9 The Court declines to expend its limited resources on a case that Plaintiff has chosen to ignore. 10 Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED for 11 failure to pay the filing fee for this action and to obey court orders. The Court DIRECTS the 12 Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this action. 13 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 14 Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days 15 of the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 16 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 17 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file objections within the specified time 18 may result in waiver of his rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 19 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: September 26, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27