From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Swingle

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 17, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2211 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-2211 KJN P

04-17-2013

GEORGE LEE, Plaintiff, v. DR. SWINGLE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff consented to proceed before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). By order filed March 6, 2013, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed, and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Thirty 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 ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

___________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Lee v. Swingle

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 17, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2211 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2013)
Case details for

Lee v. Swingle

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE LEE, Plaintiff, v. DR. SWINGLE, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 17, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-2211 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2013)