Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Erik Jason Martinez v. Steve Lambert

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 21, 2012

ERIK JASON MARTINEZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STEVE LAMBERT, DEFENDANTS.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On March 28, 2012, the court granted plaintiff's motion for a sixty-day extension of time to file an amended complaint. On April 13, 2012, and again on June 7, 2012, plaintiff filed notices of change of address. Shortly after receiving plaintiff's notices of change of address, the court re-served its March 28, 2012 order on plaintiff. The sixty-day period for filing plaintiff's amended complaint has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 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 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is 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).

20120821

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.