Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01028/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01028-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEROME CLAY, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE 

COMPANY, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:13-cv-1028 GEB CKD PS

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed February 19, 

2016, this matter was reversed and remanded. ECF Nos. 45, 46. Pursuant to the mandate, by 

order filed February 24, 2016, plaintiff was directed to file, no later than March 22, 2016, an 

amended complaint alleging only a Title VII claim against defendant Pacific Bell and only FEHA 

and § 17200 claims against defendants Union and Pacific Bell. Plaintiff was also cautioned that 

failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be 

dismissed.

The time for filing an amended complaint has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an 

amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Case 2:13-cv-01028-GEB-CKD Document 48 Filed 03/30/16 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

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.” 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: March 30, 2016

4 clay1028.fta

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:13-cv-01028-GEB-CKD Document 48 Filed 03/30/16 Page 2 of 2