Townsel v. Richard Ciummo & Associates et al
Filing
7
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice and the case closed. Findings and recommendations referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii, with objections due within thirty days of service of this order. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 11/25/2015. (Rooney, M)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
DAVID TOWNSEL,
9
10
11
12
CASE NO. 1:15-CV-894---SMS
Plaintiff,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
v.
RICHARD CIUMMO & ASSOCIATES;
KEVIN R. WEIMER,
Defendants.
13
14
15
Plaintiff David Townsel brings the instant complaint in pro se and in forma pauperis
16
against defendants Richard Ciummo & Associates and Kevin R. Weimer for actions related to
17
Plaintiff’s representation in a criminal matter.
18
On October 9, 2014, the Court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2),
19
and dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim with leave to amend. Doc. 4. The Court
20
granted leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days of the date of service of that order.
21
Plaintiff was advised that he was not required to file an amended complaint, but failure to do so
22
would result in dismissal of the action. The order dismissing the complaint with leave to amend
23
was filed and served on the same day. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.
24
RECOMMENDATION
25
Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that the action be dismissed without prejudice
26
27
28
and the case closed.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Court
Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72-
1
304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of
2
California. Within thirty (30) days after being served with a copy, Petitioner may file written
3
objections with the Court, serving a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
4
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The Court will then review
5
the Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that
6
failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District
7
Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
8
9
10
11
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 25, 2015
/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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.
Why Is My Information Online?