Ramirez v. Duffy

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/20/2017 DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED.(Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JUAN RAZO RAMIREZ, 11 12 13 No. 2:16-cv-0234 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER BRIAN DUFFY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, and consented to proceed before the 17 undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). By order filed June 30, 2016, plaintiff’s 18 complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. 19 Following multiple extensions of time, on November 7, 2016, the court recounted the myriad 20 delays in this case, and reluctantly granted plaintiff one final sixty day extension of time in which 21 to amend. Sixty days from that date have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended 22 complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to file 23 an amended complaint would result in the dismissal of this action. 24 25 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Dated: January 20, 2017 27 28 /rami0234.fta 1

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?