Hoban v. Goodlow

Full title: TIMOTHY HOBAN, Plaintiff, v. CLAUDIA GOODLOW, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Feb 23, 2011

2:10-cv-3159-JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2011)

Opinion

TIMOTHY HOBAN, Plaintiff, v. CLAUDIA GOODLOW, et al., Defendants. No. 2:10-cv-3159-JFM (PC) United States District Court, E.D. California. February 23, 2011

          ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

          JOHN F. MOULDS, Magistrate Judge.

         By order filed January 3, 2011, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district judge be assigned to this case; and

         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).