From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cruz v. Hand

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. Civ S-05-0913 GEB DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)

Opinion

No. Civ S-05-0913 GEB DAD P.

February 15, 2006


FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS


By order filed October 27, 2005, plaintiff's amended complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. On January 5, 2006, plaintiff was granted an additional thirty days to file a second amended complaint and was cautioned that no further extensions of time will be granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a second 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 11-110; 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)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The 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).


Summaries of

Cruz v. Hand

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. Civ S-05-0913 GEB DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Cruz v. Hand

Case Details

Full title:ALBERT CRUZ, JR., Plaintiff, v. DR. S. HAND, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 15, 2006

Citations

No. Civ S-05-0913 GEB DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)