From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bryan v. Swartzinegger

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Apr 3, 2009
CV 09-531-AHM(E) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2009)

Opinion


JOHN BRYAN, Plaintiff, v. SWARTZINEGGER, et al., Defendants. No. CV 09-531-AHM(E) United States District Court, C.D. California. April 3, 2009

          ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

          A. HOWARD MATZ, District Judge.

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, all of the records herein and the attached Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. The Court approves and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

         IT IS ORDERED that the Amended Complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. If Plaintiff still wishes to pursue this action, he is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Order within which to file a Second Amended Complaint. Any Second Amended Complaint shall be complete in itself. Plaintiff should not attempt to add additional defendants without leave of Court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 21. Failure timely to file a Second Amended Complaint may result in dismissal of the action.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and the Judgment herein by United States mail on Plaintiff.


Summaries of

Bryan v. Swartzinegger

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Apr 3, 2009
CV 09-531-AHM(E) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2009)
Case details for

Bryan v. Swartzinegger

Case Details

Full title:JOHN BRYAN, Plaintiff, v. SWARTZINEGGER, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 3, 2009

Citations

CV 09-531-AHM(E) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2009)