Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00472/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00472-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Daniel Ruben-Jacob Davenport
Plaintiff
Sacramento County Child Protective Services
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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DANIEL RUBEN-JACOB DAVENPORT 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SACRAMENTO COUNTY CHILD 

PROTECTIVE SERVICES, 

 Defendant. 

No. 2:16-cv-472 KJM GGH PS 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 On June 17, 2016, this court issued an Order granting plaintiff’s request to proceed with 

this action in forma pauperis and directing that an Amended Complaint that met the requirements 

outlined in that Order was to be filed within 30 days of service of the Order or this court would 

recommend that the action be dismissed. (ECF # 3) The Court record reflects that the Order was 

served by mail on the same day, June 17, 2016. To date the court has received no Amended 

Complaint. 

 In light of the foregoing IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED THAT: 

1. The Complaint be dismissed with prejudice; 

2. Judgment be entered against Plaintiff. 

 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)(1). Within fourteen 

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

Case 2:16-cv-00472-KJM-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/08/16 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

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge's Amended 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, 1156-57 

(9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: December 8, 2016 

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

 

 

Case 2:16-cv-00472-KJM-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/08/16 Page 2 of 2