Padilla v. United States Patent Office et al.

Filing 4

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/6/2017 RECOMMENDING that this case be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order; REFERRING this matter to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.;ORDERING that any objections be filed within twenty-one (21) days. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARIA D. PADILLA,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:16-cv-02631-GEB-AC (PS)

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE, et
al.,
Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was accordingly referred to the

19

undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). On November 28, 2016, this Court issued an Order

20

dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint and allowing Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint.

21

ECF No. 3. The Court warned that failure to file an amended complaint may result in a

22

recommendation by the undersigned that this action be dismissed. Id. Plaintiff’s 30 days has

23
long since passed, and she has not filed an amended complaint or taken any other action in this
24
25
26
27
28

case. Because Plaintiff failed to comply with this Court’s order, the undersigned recommends
that this case be DISMISSED.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one (21)
1

1

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

2

objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

3

Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

4
objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.
5
6
7

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
DATED: June 6, 2017

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