Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hunter v. Younglbood

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 16, 2010

LEROY DEWITT HUNTER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
D. YOUNGLBOOD, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND FOR FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER OBJECTIONS DUE IN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On January 27, 2010, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. On February 5, 2010, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. On May 4, 2010, an order was entered, vacating the findings and recommendations and granting Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint.

In the May 4, 2010, order vacating the findings and recommendations, Plaintiff was provided with specific guidance on the pleading requirements for an amended complaint and provided with the form for filing an amended complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff was also advised that should he need an extension of time to comply with the order, he should file a motion for extension of time. Plaintiff was specifically cautioned that his failure to comply with the order would result in dismissal of this action for failure to obey a court order and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The thirty day period has expired and Plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint, a motion for extension of time, or any other response to the order of May 4, 2010.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court order and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

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.

20100616

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.