IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 29, 2011
ROLANDO REINER DENEKE, PLAINTIFF,
MATTHEW CATE, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER & FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
By order filed September 30, 2011, the court granted plaintiff twenty-eight days to file an amended complaint. In the September 30th order, the court informed plaintiff of the deficiencies in his original complaint. The twenty-eight day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.*fn1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district judge be assigned to this case.
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to follow court orders and for the reasons set forth in the September 30th order. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
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." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that 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).
GGH: AB dene2368.fta