Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01575/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01575-5/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 the same day, plaintiff filed a second motion to proceed in forma pauperis. By order 1

filed October 24, 2005, the court granted plaintiff’s first motion to proceed with this action in

forma pauperis. His November 18, 2005 motion will therefore be denied as unnecessary.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLETE REO HART,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1575 MCE JFM P

vs.

DR. H. SOUFI, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed November 18, 2005, plaintiff's amended

complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. 

1

The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint or

otherwise responded to the court’s order. Accordingly, the court will recommend that this action

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

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s

November 18, 2005 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as unnecessary; and

Case 2:05-cv-01575-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 01/04/06 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

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: January 3, 2006. 

12

hart1575.fta

Case 2:05-cv-01575-MCE -JFM Document 16 Filed 01/04/06 Page 2 of 2