From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burnett v. Bell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 23, 2012
No. CIV S-11-1228 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV S-11-1228 EFB P

04-23-2012

CARLOS BURNETT, Plaintiff, v. GRAHAM BELL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to plaintiff's consent. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4).

On January 13, 2012, the court dismissed plaintiff's complaint with leave to amend. The dismissal order explained the complaint's deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies, and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint may result in this action being dismissed.

The 30-day period has expired 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 for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

____________________

EDMUND F. BRENNAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Burnett v. Bell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 23, 2012
No. CIV S-11-1228 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2012)
Case details for

Burnett v. Bell

Case Details

Full title:CARLOS BURNETT, Plaintiff, v. GRAHAM BELL, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 23, 2012

Citations

No. CIV S-11-1228 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2012)