Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00901/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00901-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
D. Ding
Defendant
Trent B. Graddy, Sr.
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 

27 

28 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TRENT B. GRADDY, SR., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D. DING, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:14-cv-0901 KJM AC P (TEMP) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 By order filed January 11, 2016, plaintiff’s first amended complaint was dismissed and 

thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. (ECF No.15.) Thirty days 

from that date have now passed, 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 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 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.” Any response to the 

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 

Case 2:14-cv-00901-KJM-AC Document 18 Filed 04/13/16 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

parties are 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 12, 2016 

Case 2:14-cv-00901-KJM-AC Document 18 Filed 04/13/16 Page 2 of 2