From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Price

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 3, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1998 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. May. 3, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-1998 KJM KJN P

05-03-2017

KEVIN LYNELL KING, Plaintiff, v. JEROME PRICE, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed October 13, 2016, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. On November 28, 2016, and February 21, 2017, plaintiff was granted extensions of time in which to file an amended complaint. Sixty days from the February 21, 2017 order have 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." 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 3, 2017

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE king1998.fta.ext


Summaries of

King v. Price

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 3, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1998 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. May. 3, 2017)
Case details for

King v. Price

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN LYNELL KING, Plaintiff, v. JEROME PRICE, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: May 3, 2017

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-1998 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. May. 3, 2017)