Dunigan v. United States

Full title: KEVIN DUNIGAN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: May 19, 2011

2:10-cv-2294 GEB DAD (PC) (E.D. Cal. May. 19, 2011)

Opinion

KEVIN DUNIGAN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, et al., Defendants. No. 2:10-cv-2294 GEB DAD (PC) United States District Court, E.D. California. May 19, 2011

          FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

          DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.

         By order filed November 22, 2010, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. By order filed January 3, 2011, plaintiff was granted an additional one hundred twenty days in which to file an amended complaint. The latter period has now expired, 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. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. 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).