Martin Lee Foster v. Wendy Corell
Martin Lee Foster v. Wendy Corell
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARTIN LEE FOSTER, No. 2:25-cv-2571 CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER & FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 WENDY CORELL, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a former county prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action 18 pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed November 10, 2025, plaintiff’s complaint was 19 dismissed, and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Thirty days from that 20 date have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded 21 to the court’s order. 22 In recommending this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, the Court has 23 considered “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to 24 manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring 25 disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives.” Ferdik v. 26 Bonzelet,
963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61(9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). Because this case cannot 27 move forward without plaintiff’s participation, the Court finds the factors weigh in favor of 28 dismissal. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall assign a district 2 || judge to this action; and 3 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 4 || See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 7 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 8 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 9 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 10 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 11 || Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,
951 F.2d 1153(9th Cir. 1991). 12 13 Dated: December 19, 2025 Chan Spo 15 CHI SOO KIM 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 Fost2s71.tta/2 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown