IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 2, 2012
JOHN LISCHEFSKI, PLAINTIFF,
C/O WEATHERWAX, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
By order filed May 15, 2012, the court dismissed plaintiff's complaint and granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (Dkt. No. 9.) Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply with the court's order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 7.) By order filed June 19, 2012, the court granted plaintiff an additional ninety days within which to file an amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 11.) The extended period has now expired, and plaintiff has neither filed an amended complaint nor otherwise responded to the court's directive that he do so. It appears that plaintiff has abandoned this case.
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 days 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." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. 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).
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.