Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01741/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01741-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Daniel Bjorlin
Plaintiff
Masdeo
Defendant

Document Text:

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

DANIEL BJORLIN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1741 MCE PAN P

vs.

MASDEO, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed December 27, 2005, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty

days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. By order filed February 24, 2006, plaintiff

was given an additional thirty days to file an amended complaint. The latter thirty day period 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 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

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

Case 2:05-cv-01741-MCE -PAN Document 12 Filed 04/07/06 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

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: April 6, 2006.

12

bjor1741.fta

Case 2:05-cv-01741-MCE -PAN Document 12 Filed 04/07/06 Page 2 of 2