Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00740/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00740-8/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

Plaintiff filed his amended complaint on the same day that he submitted the documents 1

required for service of his original complaint, which had been screened and found appropriate

for service on some defendants. (Doc. 9.) However, as plaintiff was allowed to amend his

complaint as a matter of right, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to file an amended compliant

(doc. 17 at 2: 4-5) and screened the amended complaint. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TOR WEBSTER, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0740 GEB CMK P

vs.

ROD HICKMAN, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis with a

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local

Rule 72-302 by the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

By order filed October 30, 2006, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims with leave

to amend the complaint within thirty days. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff 1

has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s complaint be

Case 2:06-cv-00740-GEB-CMK Document 18 Filed 12/12/06 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

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 Title 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. See Martinez

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: December 11, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00740-GEB-CMK Document 18 Filed 12/12/06 Page 2 of 2