IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 20, 2011
HOWARD SCOTT, PLAINTIFF
M. MCDONALD, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to plaintiff's consent. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4).
On April 7, 2011, the court found that plaintiff's second amended complaint stated potentially cognizable claims as to defendants defendants Sharrb, Cooper, Oateman, Nelson, Medina, Betty, and Barron. The court further found that plaintiff had failed to state a cognizable claim as to the remaining defendants and dismissed them with leave to amend. Plaintiff was directed to submit the documents to effect service of the complaint on defendants Sharrb, Cooper, Oateman, Nelson, Medina, Betty, and Barron or an amended complaint attempting to state claims as to defendants McDonald, Stovall, Menina, Lopez, Kelly, Bowers, Hole, Klaso, Crandle, Hoover, Hole, and Hislo within thirty days. Plaintiff was admonished that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action.
The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not submitted the materials necessary for service on the above-listed defendants, has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110, 183(a).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.