From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Fowell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 2, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2901 JAM CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-2901 JAM CKD PS

04-02-2013

BERNARD TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. FOWELL, DEPUTY #2358, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed February 26, 2013, plaintiff's amended complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

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).

______________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Taylor v. Fowell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 2, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2901 JAM CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2013)
Case details for

Taylor v. Fowell

Case Details

Full title:BERNARD TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. FOWELL, DEPUTY #2358, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 2, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-2901 JAM CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2013)