Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06638/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06638-1/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

ELONZA JESSIE TYLER,

Plaintiff, CV F 04 6638 OWW WMW P

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

E. ALAMEIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302 pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

By order filed November 17, 2005, the court issued an order dismissing certain

defendants for failure to state a claim and directing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within

thirty days. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. The court specifically cautioned

plaintiff that his failure to do so would result in a recommendation that defendants Grannis and

Turges. 

 In the November 17, 2005, order the court informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies in

the first amended complaint, and dismissed certain defendants with leave to amend. Because

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the court recommends dismissal of the defendants

noted in the first amended complaint with prejudice for failure to state a federal claim upon

Case 1:04-cv-06638-LJO-BAM Document 23 Filed 03/09/06 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

which the court could grant relief. See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446, 1448 (9

th Cir. 1987)

(prisoner must be given notice of deficiencies and opportunity to amend prior to dismissing for

failure to state a claim).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Grannis and

Turges be dismissed.

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 (9th Cir. 1998). 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 8, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06638-LJO-BAM Document 23 Filed 03/09/06 Page 2 of 2