Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02307/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02307-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Willie Smith
Plaintiff
State of California
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

WILLIE SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2307 MCE PAN P

vs.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Defendant. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed May 18, 2006, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days

leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The 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

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

/////

Case 2:05-cv-02307-MCE -EFB Document 9 Filed 08/25/06 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

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

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

DATED: August 24, 2006.

12

smit2307.fta

Case 2:05-cv-02307-MCE -EFB Document 9 Filed 08/25/06 Page 2 of 2