From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrison v. Flores

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 9, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1130 MCE CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-1130 MCE CKD P

05-09-2017

CARL HARRISON, Plaintiff, v. FLORES, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On March 22, 2017, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations will be 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 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: May 9, 2017

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1
harr1130.fta


Summaries of

Harrison v. Flores

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 9, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1130 MCE CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2017)
Case details for

Harrison v. Flores

Case Details

Full title:CARL HARRISON, Plaintiff, v. FLORES, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: May 9, 2017

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-1130 MCE CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2017)