Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02044/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02044-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

RANDAL SCOT COMBS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIV 06-02044 PHX JWS (MEA)

) 

DR. FRIEDMAN, DO ABREGO, ) ORDER

DO WATERS, DO NYAKONDO, )

DO WHITNEY, DO CAMANDINI, ) 

)

Defendants. ) 

____________________________ )

TO THE HONORABLE JOHN W. SEDWICK:

On April 10, 2007, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an

amended complaint on or before May 9, 2007. See Docket No. 38.

Plaintiff was warned that the failure to file an amended

complaint by that date would result in the dismissal of his

case. On May 12, 2007, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for

an extension of this deadline to July 13, 2007. See Docket No.

44. As of July 30, 2007, no amended complaint has been docketed

in this matter.

Accordingly, 

IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s claims as stated in the

third amended complaint be denied and this matter be dismissed

with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to file and serve an

Case 2:06-cv-02044-JWS Document 45 Filed 08/01/07 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

27

28 -2-

amended complaint within the time specified by the Court in its

order at Docket No. 38.

This recommendation is not an order that is immediately

appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of

appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules of Appellate

Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the district

court’s judgment. 

Pursuant to Rule 72(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

the parties shall have ten (10) days from the date of service of

a copy of this recommendation within which to file specific

written objections with the Court. Thereafter, the parties have

ten (10) days within which to file a response to the objections.

Failure to timely file objections to any factual or legal

determinations of the Magistrate Judge will be considered a

waiver of a party’s right to de novo appellate consideration of

the issues. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,

1121 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 900 (2003).

Failure to timely file objections to any factual or legal

determinations of the Magistrate Judge will constitute a waiver

of a party’s right to appellate review of the findings of fact

and conclusions of law in an order or judgment entered pursuant

to the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. 

DATED this 30th day of July, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02044-JWS Document 45 Filed 08/01/07 Page 2 of 2