David Sanchez v. Riverside County Code Enforcement Agency et al
| David Sanchez |
| Olivia Balderrama, Stacy Baumgartner, Dawn Burnett, Anita Bustillos, Ana Carrillo, County of Riverside, California, Crawford, Dean Deines, Jacob Dietrich, Does, Greg Flannery, Regina Keyes, Mary Ortiz, Samantha Phillips, Riverside County Code Enforcement Agency, Elizabeth Ross, Michael Sanders, Hector Viray and Nicole Wapner |
| 5:2015cv02493 |
| December 8, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| S. James Otero |
| Civil Rights: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
47
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE COURT SHOULD NOT REVOKE PLAINTIFFS ELECTRONIC FILING PRIVILEGES by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, i.e., by not later than April 14, 2017, plaintiff shall show good cause, if there be any, why he has not complied with Local Rule 5-4.1.1 and why his e-filing privileges should not be revoked. (dml)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge S. James Otero. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: (1) the Motion to Dismiss is granted for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation; (2) the Complaint is dismissed with leave to amend; and (3) if plaintiff still wishes to proceed with this action, he shall file a First Amended Complaint within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this Order. (dml)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedureand Local Rule 41-1, that within seven (7) days of the date of this Order, i.e., by not later than Mar ch 16, 2016, plaintiff shall show good cause, if there be any, why service was not made on the defendants by March 7, 2016, and why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to effectuate service and for lack of prosecution. Failure timely to respond to this Order to Show Cause or to show cause, may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to effectuate service, lack of prosecution, and/or failure to obey the Court's order. (dml)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
