Covey v. State of California

Filing 6

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/5/13 recommending that this action be dismissed. F&R referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections to F&R due within fourteen days.(Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SONYA YVETTE COVEY,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-1316-JAM-EFB PS

v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA;
SACRAMENTO COUNTY;
WOODLAND COUNTY,

16

Defendants.

17
18

This action, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the

19

undersigned under Local Rule 302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On July 12, 2013,

20

the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend. The order explained the

21

complaint’s deficiencies, gave plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint correcting those

22

deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a

23

recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 3. On August 1, 2013, the court granted

24

plaintiff an extension of time, requiring her to file an amended complaint by October 11, 2013.

25

ECF No. 5. Plaintiff was again admonished that failure to file an amended complaint may result

26

in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

27

/////

28

/////
1

1
2

The deadline has passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise
responded to the order.1

3
4

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, and that the
Clerk be directed to close this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

9

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time

10

may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455

11

(9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

12

Dated: November 5, 2013.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff was
properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of her current
address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of
the party is fully effective.
2