Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00247/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00247-3/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

BRIAN SCOTT SEEFELDT,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-0247 GGH P

vs.

CALIFORNIA FORENSIC 

MEDICAL GROUP, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER &

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. 

Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

By order filed April 22, 2010, the court determined that plaintiff had stated a

colorable claim against defendant Kadevari. The court also dismissed plaintiff’s claims against

the remaining defendants with twenty-eight days leave to amend. The twenty-eight day period

has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the

court’s order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a

district judge to this case.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all defendants but Kadevari be dismissed

Case 2:10-cv-00247-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 08/17/10 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

from this action without prejudice. See Local Rule 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 fourteen

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.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are

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: August 17, 2010

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH: AB

seef247.b3

Case 2:10-cv-00247-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 08/17/10 Page 2 of 2