From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barger v. CDCR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 9, 2015
No. 2:15-cv-0072 GEB KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 9, 2015)

Opinion

No. 2:15-cv-0072 GEB KJN P

06-09-2015

GARY DALE BARGER, Plaintiff, v. CDCR, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed April 23, 2015, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. (See ECF No. 27.) More than forty-five days from that date have now passed, 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)(1). 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 response 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). Dated: June 9, 2015

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
/barg0072.fta


Summaries of

Barger v. CDCR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 9, 2015
No. 2:15-cv-0072 GEB KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 9, 2015)
Case details for

Barger v. CDCR

Case Details

Full title:GARY DALE BARGER, Plaintiff, v. CDCR, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jun 9, 2015

Citations

No. 2:15-cv-0072 GEB KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 9, 2015)