Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01447/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01447-7/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

HAROLD L. ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1447 LKK GGH P

vs.

SHASTA COUNTY PROBATION, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. On June 26, 2007, the court

dismissed with leave to amend all claims contained in the amended complaint filed May 4, 2007,

but for the claim regarding withdrawal of funds from plaintiff’s trust fund against defendant

Keating. The court ordered that if plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within twenty

days, it would order service of defendant Keating. Twenty days passed and plaintiff did not file

an amended complaint. Accordingly, the court separately orders service of defendant Keating

and recommends dismissal of the remaining claims.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all claims contained in the amended

complaint filed May 4, 2007, but for the claim against defendant Keating regarding withdrawal

of funds from plaintiff’s trust fund, be dismissed.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01447-LKK -GGH Document 27 Filed 08/07/07 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

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 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. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

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

DATED: 8/7/07

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

arm1447.56

Case 2:06-cv-01447-LKK -GGH Document 27 Filed 08/07/07 Page 2 of 2