Patrick Blackshire v. United States of America

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Patrick Blackshire v. United States of America

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BLACKSHIRE, No. 2:25-cv-03149 DJC CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and in forma pauperis. This proceeding was 18 referred to this court by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 19 On November 4, 2025, the undersigned issued an order to show cause why this action 20 should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff was advised that failure to allege a 21 proper basis for jurisdiction would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 22 Plaintiff has filed a response, but it does not allege a proper basis for jurisdiction or show cause 23 why this action should not be dismissed. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for lack of 25 jurisdiction. 26 In light of these recommendations, IT IS ALSO HEREBY ORDERED that all pleading, 27 discovery, and motion practice in this action are STAYED pending resolution of the findings and 28 recommendations. With the exception of objections to the findings and recommendations and 1 | any non-frivolous motions for emergency relief, the court will not entertain or respond to any 2 || motions and other filings until the findings and recommendations are resolved. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 5 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 6 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 7 || to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 8 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 9 || Martinez v. YIst,

951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991). 10 | Dated: November 14, 2025 / ae □□ / a Ly a

12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 || 2/blac3149.f&rs-nojuris 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown