Case No. 2:19-cv-00930-APG-EJY
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Re: Failure to Comply With Court's August 16, 2019 Order (ECF No. 4)
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's August 16, 2019 Order (ECF No. 4). On August 16, 2019, this Court granted Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1), and dismissed Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 1-1) without prejudice with leave to amend. Specifically, this Court held that:
Plaintiff Brigido D. Solis brings a claim that appears to allege race discrimination against Defendant Keolis. Such a claim is likely to fall outside a collective bargaining agreement to which Plaintiff also refers. However, Plaintiff's race discrimination fails to sufficient allege facts upon which relief may be granted pursuant to the standards established in Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. That is, Plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of misconduct." Id. Further, "[a] claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. at 678.ECF No. 4 at 2:10-17. In light of the above, the Court ordered Plaintiff to "file the amended complaint within 30 days from the date of this Order[, and warned Plaintiff that a f]ailure to comply with this Order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed." Id. at 3:14-16.
To date, Plaintiff has not submitted an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or taken any other action to prosecute this case.
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's action, docketed as 2:19-cv-00930-APG-EJY, be dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Clerk of the Court be instructed to close this case and enter judgment accordingly.
DATED: January 24, 2020.
ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Finding and Recommendation must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).