Lynch v. Doe, et al

Filing 29

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending that this 22 Action be Dismissed, with Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief may be Granted; Objections, if any, Due in Thirty Days signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 6/13/2012. Referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii. Objections to F&R due by 7/17/2012. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANTHONEY LYNCH,

12
13
14

1:09-cv-02097-AWI-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,
v.
WARDEN OF PLEASANT VALLEY
STATE PRISON, et al.,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION BE
DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR
FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON
WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED
(Doc. 28.)

15
16

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN THIRTY
DAYS

Defendant.

17

/

18
Anthoney Lynch ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed
19
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 2, 2009. (Doc. 1.) On April 14,
20
2011, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend.
21
(Doc. 13.) On October 12, 2011, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint, adding two co22
plaintiffs, Thibodeaux and Willie Jones. (Doc. 22.) On May 1, 2012, the Court dismissed the First
23
Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim, and severed the three plaintiffs’ claims, opening new
24
cases for the two co-plaintiffs. (Doc. 28.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a Second Amended
25
Complaint within thirty days. Id. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise responded
26
to the Court’s order. As a result, there is no pleading on file which sets forth any claims upon which
27
relief may be granted.
28
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and

2

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), this action be DISMISSED, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff’s failure to state

3

a claim upon which relief may be granted under section 1983, and that this dismissal be subject to

4

the “three-strikes” provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098

5

(9th Cir. 2011).

6

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

7

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty days

8

after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections

9

with the court. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings

10

and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time

11

may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.

12

1991).

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated:
6i0kij

June 13, 2012

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2