Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01495/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01495-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 On October 5, 2007, defendants responded to plaintiff’s contentions concerning access 1

to the law library. Defendants confirmed that plaintiff was “verified to have a court deadline

within the next 30 days and was granted PLU status through October 5, 2007. . . . Nonetheless,

according to law library records, since Harmon’s designation as a PLU, inmate Harmon has not

requested physical access to the law library.” (Id. at 4.)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE CEDELL HARMON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1495 LEW JFM P

vs.

WARDEN D.K. SISTO, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed July 25, 2007, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days

leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Plaintiff was also directed to file a completed in

forma pauperis affidavit or pay the required filing fee. On September 13, 2007, plaintiff was

granted an extension of time, until October 5, 2007, in which to comply with the July 25 order.

That date has now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise

responded to the court’s order.1

/////

Case 2:07-cv-01495-LEW -JFM Document 7 Filed 10/31/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

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

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

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

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: October 30, 2007.

/001; harm1495.fta

Case 2:07-cv-01495-LEW -JFM Document 7 Filed 10/31/07 Page 2 of 2