Stringfellow v. Price

Full title: ROBERT STRINGFELLOW, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN PRICE, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Oct 28, 2015

2:15-cv-1314 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2015)

Opinion

ROBERT STRINGFELLOW, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN PRICE, et al., Defendants. No. 2:15-cv-1314 KJN P United States District Court, E.D. California. October 28, 2015

          ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff consented to proceed before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). By order filed July 21, 2015, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. On September 15, 2015, plaintiff was granted an additional thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. 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).