IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 6, 2010
ANTHONY E. MACK, PLAINTIFF,
TILTON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 20, 2010, the court found that the complaint stated cognizable excessive force claims as to defendants Merriweather, Hampton, Cross and Johnston. The court further found that, with the exception of the excessive force claim, plaintiff had failed to state a cognizable claim for relief against any additional defendants. The court gave plaintiff 30 days to submit materials for service of process on defendants, or, alternatively, 30 days to file an amended complaint to attempt to state cognizable claims under the theories listed above.
On August 30, 2010, and October 18, 2010, the court granted plaintiff extensions of time to comply with the July 20, 2010 order.
The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not submitted the materials necessary for service on defendants Merriweather, Hampton, Cross and Johnston, has not file an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.
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." 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 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.