From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carroll v. California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 29, 2018
No. 2: 16-cv-1759 TLN KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2: 16-cv-1759 TLN KJN P

06-29-2018

TREMAYNE DEON CARROLL, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed May 18, 2018, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint. Thirty days from that date have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, 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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff 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." //// ////

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). Dated: June 29, 2018

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Car1759.fta(2)


Summaries of

Carroll v. California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 29, 2018
No. 2: 16-cv-1759 TLN KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2018)
Case details for

Carroll v. California

Case Details

Full title:TREMAYNE DEON CARROLL, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 29, 2018

Citations

No. 2: 16-cv-1759 TLN KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2018)