Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00023/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00023-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

ANTHONY STITH,

Plaintiff, CV F 05 0023 AWI WMW P

vs. FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION

HARREL WATTS, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. On

October 4, 2006, an order was entered by the District Court, adopting the September 18, 2006,

findings and recommendations.

The October 4, 2006, order granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss and granted

Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. The order cautioned Plaintiff that failure to file an

amended complaint would result in this action’s dismissal. On November 22, 2006, Plaintiff

was granted a thirty day extension of time in which to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has

failed to file an amended complaint. Because Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the

court recommends dismissal of the claims made in the original complaint with prejudice for

failure to state a federal claim upon which the court could grant relief. See Noll v. Carlson, 809

F. 2d 1446, 1448 (9 Cir. 1987) (prisoner must be given notice of deficiencies and opportunity to th

amend prior to dismissing for failure to state a claim).

Case 1:05-cv-00023-AWI-WMW Document 42 Filed 01/12/07 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for

failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

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)(1)(B). Within

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s findings of fact. See

Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9 Cir. 1998). Failure to file objections within the th

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 11, 2007 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

j14hj0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00023-AWI-WMW Document 42 Filed 01/12/07 Page 2 of 2