Jenkins v. Schubert et al

Filing 8

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/20/2017 RECOMMENDING that the 1 Complaint be dismissed, and that theClerk be directed to close this case. Referred to District Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (York, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JAMAL A. JENKINS,

11
12
13

No. 2:17-cv-1005-JAM-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ANNE MARIE SCHUBERT, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15
16

On July 28, 2017, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend.1 The

17

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

18

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

19

complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 7.

20
21
22
23

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); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110.

24

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

25

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

26

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

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

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

Dated: November 20, 2017.

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