Blank v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation

Filing 4

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/20/2017 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed and the clerk be directed to close the case. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

PAUL LOUIS BLANK,

11
12
13
14

No. 2:16-cv-2775-TLN-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION,
Defendant.

15
16
17

On May 10, 2017, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend.1 The

18

order explained the complaint’s deficiencies, gave plaintiff thirty days to file an amended

19

complaint correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended

20

complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 3.

21
22
23
24

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

25

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

26

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

27
28

1

This action, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the
undersigned under Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1

1

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

2

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

3

and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right

4

to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998);

5

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

6

Dated: June 20, 2017.

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