From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maquinales v. Spearman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 26, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-00489 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2:18-cv-00489 CKD P

11-26-2018

RICHARD MAQUINALES Plaintiff, v. SPEARMAN, et al., Defendant.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed October 10, 2018, 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 the Clerk of Court randomly assign this case to a district court judge.

IT IS FURTHER 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, 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 may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: November 26, 2018

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12/maqu0489.fta.docx


Summaries of

Maquinales v. Spearman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 26, 2018
No. 2:18-cv-00489 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2018)
Case details for

Maquinales v. Spearman

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD MAQUINALES Plaintiff, v. SPEARMAN, et al., Defendant.

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

Date published: Nov 26, 2018

Citations

No. 2:18-cv-00489 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2018)