IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 20, 2011
EARNEST C. WOODS, PLAINTIFF,
TOM L. CAREY, 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 March 25, 2011, the court dismissed plaintiff's fourth amended complaint for failure to state a claim, improperly joining of claims and failure to comply with the court's instructions regarding the filing of the amended complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110, 183(a). The dismissal order explained the complaint's deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
On April 15, 2011, plaintiff filed a document objecting to the March 25th order. On April 29, 2011, the district judge construed that document as a motion for reconsideration and affirmed this court's March 25, 2011 order. The time for complying with this court's March 25, 2011 order has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.
In light of the above, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110, 183(a).
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: May 20, 2011.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.