Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00339/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00339-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

 The court has given consideration to plaintiff’s status as a pro se litigant. Ferdik v. 1

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992). The court carefully explained the defects in

plaintiff’s original complaint and advised plaintiff that failure to correct them may result in

dismissal.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHEENA MORGAN and MINOR,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-06-0339 GEB PAN (GGH) PS

vs.

STATE OF TEXAS et al., FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Defendants.

 /

By order filed April 19, 2006, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended

complaint that (1) named Ms. Morgan’s minor daughter as a plaintiff only if her daughter was

legally represented, and (2) named only proper defendants. The thirty-day period set forth in that

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

to the court’s order.

Accordingly, for the reasons given in the court’s April 19, 2006 order, and for

plaintiff’s failure to respond to that order, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be

dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).1

Case 2:06-cv-00339-GEB-PAN Document 6 Filed 06/21/06 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

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the Honorable Garland E.

Burrell, Jr., the United States District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten 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: 6/21/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOW6: MORGAN.F&R.fta

Case 2:06-cv-00339-GEB-PAN Document 6 Filed 06/21/06 Page 2 of 2