(PC) Townsend v. Parrish et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOSEPH TOWNSEND,
Plaintiff,
v.
PARRISH, et al.,
Defendants.
No. 2:22-cv-1278 DJC AC P
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. On August 8, 2025, defendants filed a motion to (1) compel plaintiff’s
meaningful participation in his deposition, (2) compel responses to defendant’s interrogatories
and request for production, and (3) deem defendant’s request for admissions admitted. ECF No.
42. On October 30, 2025, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-
opposition to the pending motion within twenty-one days. ECF No. 47. In the same order,
plaintiff was informed that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this
action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b). Id. The twenty-one-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a
response to defendants’ motions or otherwise responded to the court’s order.
In recommending this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, the court has
considered “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring
disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives.” Ferdik v.
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). Because this case cannot
move forward without plaintiff’s participation, the court finds the factors weigh in favor of
dismissal.
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be
dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). If the action is
dismissed without prejudice, defendants’ motion to compel (ECF No. 42) should be denied as
moot.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the
objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The
parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to
appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
DATED: December 8, 2025