Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02317/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02317-6/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

JOHN ERIC CHATMON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2317 DFL DAD P

vs.

DENTON, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed October 16, 2006, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty

days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. On January 19, 2007, the undersigned

filed findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s

failure to comply with the court’s October 16, 2006 order. On February 20, 2007, plaintiff filed

objections to the findings and recommendations. On March 8, 2007, the findings and

recommendations filed January 19, 2007 were vacated, and plaintiff was granted an additional

thirty days to amend the complaint. That period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an

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 2:05-cv-02317-JKS-DAD Document 15 Filed 04/19/07 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

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: April 18, 2007.

DAD:lg

chat2317.fta(2)

Case 2:05-cv-02317-JKS-DAD Document 15 Filed 04/19/07 Page 2 of 2