From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. Harringon

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 12, 2011
No. CIV S-09-2426 JAM EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-09-2426 JAM EFB P.

May 12, 2011


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 15, 2011, the court determined that plaintiff's amended complaint did not state a cognizable claim for relief against defendant Harrington. The court allowed plaintiff 30 days to submit an amended complaint to attempt to state a cognizable claim against defendant Harrington. On April 29, 2011, plaintiff consented to the dismissal of defendant Harrington without prejudice.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Harrington be dismissed from this action.

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, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Bell v. Harringon

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 12, 2011
No. CIV S-09-2426 JAM EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Bell v. Harringon

Case Details

Full title:HORACE ANDREW BELL, Plaintiff, v. KELLY HARRINGTON, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: May 12, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-09-2426 JAM EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 12, 2011)