From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Ca. Prison Indus. Auth.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 31, 2012
No. CIV S-11-0164 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV S-11-0164 CKD P

01-31-2012

PAUL D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. CA. PRISON INDUSTRY AUTHORITY, et al., Defendant.


ORDER

On January 31, 2011, plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned (docket no. 4). By order filed December 21, 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 this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

_______________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Johnson v. Ca. Prison Indus. Auth.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 31, 2012
No. CIV S-11-0164 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2012)
Case details for

Johnson v. Ca. Prison Indus. Auth.

Case Details

Full title:PAUL D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. CA. PRISON INDUSTRY AUTHORITY, et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 31, 2012

Citations

No. CIV S-11-0164 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2012)