Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01518/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01518-3/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

GEORGE ARLIS VALENZUELA,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S-07-1518 GEB EFB P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, suing for alleged civil rights violations. See 42

U.S.C. § 1983. On April 9, 2008, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a

cognizable claim against any defendant. The dismissal order explained the complaint’s

deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies,

and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 

On May 12, 2008, plaintiff requested an extension of time. On May 14, 2008, plaintiff

was granted an additional 30 days in which to file his amended complaint. 

The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or

otherwise responded to the court’s order.

////

Case 2:07-cv-01518-GEB-EFB Document 11 Filed 07/08/08 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 for failure to

state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

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 15 days after

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

with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections

to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158

F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: July 7, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01518-GEB-EFB Document 11 Filed 07/08/08 Page 2 of 2