From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramey v. Franco

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 5, 2016
No. 2:16-cv-2107 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2016)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-2107 JAM CKD P

12-05-2016

JOHNNEY RAMEY, Plaintiff, v. J. FRANCO, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On October 20, 2016, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed, and he was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was advised that failure to file an amended complaint would result in dismissal of this action. (Id.) The thirty days has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

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)(l). 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: December 5, 2016

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 / rame2107.fta_fr


Summaries of

Ramey v. Franco

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 5, 2016
No. 2:16-cv-2107 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2016)
Case details for

Ramey v. Franco

Case Details

Full title:JOHNNEY RAMEY, Plaintiff, v. J. FRANCO, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Dec 5, 2016

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-2107 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2016)