From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Butler v. Mullican

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 4, 2017
No. 2:17-cv-01343 TLN CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:17-cv-01343 TLN CKD (PS)

08-04-2017

JAMES L. BUTLER, Plaintiff, v. RALPH MULLICAN, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

On July 7, 2017, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause within fourteen days why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. That period has expired, and plaintiff has not shown a basis for federal jurisdiction in this matter.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the above-entitled action be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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." Any reply to the objections //// //// shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the objections. The parties are 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). Dated: August 4, 2017

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 butler1343.nojuris_jo


Summaries of

Butler v. Mullican

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 4, 2017
No. 2:17-cv-01343 TLN CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2017)
Case details for

Butler v. Mullican

Case Details

Full title:JAMES L. BUTLER, Plaintiff, v. RALPH MULLICAN, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Aug 4, 2017

Citations

No. 2:17-cv-01343 TLN CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2017)