Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729-6/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSE T. MOTEN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-1729 GEB DAD P

vs.

JAMES GOMEZ, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed August 15, 2005, plaintiff’s second amended complaint was

dismissed and thirty days leave to file a third amended complaint was granted. On September 22,

2005, plaintiff was granted an extension of time to October 25, 2005 to file his third amended

complaint. On November 7, 2005, plaintiff was granted a further extension of time to December

6, 2005, in which to comply with the court’s order and was cautioned that failure to do so would

result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The entire period of time has now

expired, and plaintiff has not filed a third amended complaint or otherwise responded to the

court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

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

/////

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 36 Filed 12/13/05 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

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: December 12, 2005.

DAD:lg

moten1729.fta

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 36 Filed 12/13/05 Page 2 of 2