Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00754/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00754-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
AutoZone, Inc.
Defendant
Michael Vigil
Plaintiff

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

MICHAEL VIGIL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-08-0754 JAM KJM PS

vs.

AUTOZONE, INC.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed June 20, 2008, plaintiff’s amended complaint was dismissed and

thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now

expired, and plaintiff has not filed a second 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

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

Case 2:08-cv-00754-JAM -KJM Document 7 Filed 09/09/08 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

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

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

DATED: September 8, 2008. 

vigli754.fta

Case 2:08-cv-00754-JAM -KJM Document 7 Filed 09/09/08 Page 2 of 2