Dahl v. Virga, et al.

Filing 29

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/13/15 ordering this action is dismissed without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT EDWARD DAHL, JR.,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-0949 AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

TIMOTHY VIRGA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned

19

magistrate judge for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 305(a). See ECF

20

No. 4. By order filed August 7, 2015, this court requested, for the second time, that the Office of

21

the California Attorney General (AG) contact officials at the California Department of

22

Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), to determine the location of plaintiff’s missing property.

23

See ECF No. 27. The AG timely filed a supplemental response on August 28, 2015, which

24

indicated that plaintiff had received all of his property. See ECF No. 28.

25

The court’s August 7, 2015 order also dismissed plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint

26

with leave to amend, directed plaintiff to review the AG’s supplemental response and then, if

27

dissatisfied, to file a Third Amended Complaint by October 1, 2015. See ECF No. 27 at 3.

28

Plaintiff was informed that “failure to timely file a Third Amended Complaint will result in the
1

1
2

dismissal of this action without prejudice.” Id.
The time for filing a Third Amended Complaint has expired and plaintiff has not

3

communicated with court. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed

4

without prejudice.

5

DATED: October 13, 2015

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2