From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnes v. Catlin

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 6, 2022
2:21-cv-1911 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cv-1911 CKD P

09-06-2022

ANTOINE DESHAWN BARNES, Plaintiff, v. D. CATLIN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CAROLYN K. DELANEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On July 25, 2022, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case; and

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 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 waives the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Barnes v. Catlin

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 6, 2022
2:21-cv-1911 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2022)
Case details for

Barnes v. Catlin

Case Details

Full title:ANTOINE DESHAWN BARNES, Plaintiff, v. D. CATLIN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 6, 2022

Citations

2:21-cv-1911 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 6, 2022)