From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dahl v. Virga

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 19, 2015
2:14-cv-2907 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2015)

Opinion


ROBERT E. DAHL, JR., Plaintiff, v. TIMOTHY VIRGA, et al., Defendants. No. 2:14-cv-2907 KJN P United States District Court, E.D. California. March 19, 2015

          ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff consented to proceed before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). By order filed February 4, 2015, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. 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 ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).


Summaries of

Dahl v. Virga

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 19, 2015
2:14-cv-2907 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2015)
Case details for

Dahl v. Virga

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT E. DAHL, JR., Plaintiff, v. TIMOTHY VIRGA, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Mar 19, 2015

Citations

2:14-cv-2907 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2015)