IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 16, 2009
FRANK GONZALES, PLAINTIFF,
E. ALAMEIDA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: William M. Wunderlich United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
This action was dismissed pursuant to an order entered on May 16, 2008. That order adopted the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge that this action be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute. The recommendation was based upon Plaintiff's failure to file an amended complaint in compliance with the June 28, 2007, order dismissing the original complaint with leave to amend.
On August 7, 2008, an order was entered, denying Plaintiff's request for discovery and directing him to show cause, within thirty days, why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to prosecute. Plaintiff has been granted extensions of time, and has not filed a response to the order to show cause.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty 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 reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge's findings of fact. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). 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).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.