From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 1, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2732 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-2732 CKD P

04-01-2013

RICHARD C. BELL, Plaintiff, v. GARY SWARTHOUT, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to have a magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in this case. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

By order filed February 15, 2013, 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 or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

_____________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Bell v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 1, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2732 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2013)
Case details for

Bell v. Swarthout

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD C. BELL, Plaintiff, v. GARY SWARTHOUT, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 1, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-2732 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2013)