Foust v. Hardin Insurance Company et al

Filing 23

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 09/22/17 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CARL FOUST,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-1227 JAM CKD P

v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

HARDIN INSURANCE COMPANY, et
al.,
Defendants.

16
17

By order filed July 19, 2017, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to

18

file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has

19

not filed an amended complaint.1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

20
21

prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

22

////

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The court has received letters from Richard Treg and Philip Stamps, both of whom assert that
they have been assisting Mr. Foust in the preparation of legal documents. ECF Nos. 12 and 22.
Both men state that Mr. Foust is intellectually disabled, and request that the court reconsider its
orders denying the appointment of counsel. ECF Nos. 11 and 21. The court declines to revisit its
earlier orders, given the deficiencies in the substance of Mr. Foust’s complaint against Hardin
Insurance Company. Although the court provided Mr. Foust an opportunity to amend the
complaint, it does not appear that amendment would cure the problem: Mr. Foust’s displeasure
that the insurance company mailed him a check instead of delivering it personally does not state a
claim under federal law.
1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

5

Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time

6

waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.

7

1991).

8

Dated: September 22, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14

1
fous1277.fta

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2