Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00754/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00754-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
John E. Potter
Defendant
Charles Watson
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

CHARLES WATSON, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-0754 MCE EFB PS

vs.

JOHN E. POTTER, POSTMASTER

GENERAL, UNITED STATES

POSTAL SERVICE,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

This action, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the

undersigned under Local Rule 72-302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On May 24,

2007, the court granted plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed plaintiff’s

complaint with leave to amend. The order explained the complaint’s deficiencies and gave

plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies. On June 22,

2007, plaintiff filed his amended complaint. On August 1, 2007, the court dismissed plaintiff’s

amended complaint with leave to amend. That order likewise explained the amended

complaint’s deficiencies and gave plaintiff thirty days to file a second amended complaint

correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint

would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

Case 2:07-cv-00754-MCE -EFB Document 9 Filed 09/19/07 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

The thirty-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or

otherwise responded to the order. 

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule

11-110. 

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 ten 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.” Failure to file objections within the specified time

may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455

(9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: September 18, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00754-MCE -EFB Document 9 Filed 09/19/07 Page 2 of 2