Papenhausen v. Clark et al
Filing
7
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 3/27/2012 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SCOTT PAPENHOUSEN,
11
12
13
14
15
16
Plaintiff,
No. 2:12-cv-0018 KJM JFM (PC)
vs.
STEVE CLARK, et al.,
Defendants.
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
/
By order filed February 17, 2012, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty
17
days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and
18
plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.
19
20
21
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed
without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District
22
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen
23
days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written
24
objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s
25
Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served
26
within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file
1
1
objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.
2
Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
3
DATED: March 27, 2012.
4
5
6
7
8
12
pape0018.fta
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?