IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 7, 2011
MICHAEL JAMES WALKER, PLAINTIFF,
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, 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 June 30, 2010, the court dismissed plaintiff's original complaint with leave to amend. On October 4, 2010, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. On November 9, 2010, the court again dismissed plaintiff's complaint with leave to amend. The dismissal order explained the complaint's deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file a second amended complaint correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file a second amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
The 30-day period has expired 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
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). Dated: January 7, 2011.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.