From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rush v. Kudlata

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0486 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0486 MCE GGH P.

August 24, 2006


FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS


By order filed May 31, 2006, the court granted plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint. In the May 31st order, the court informed plaintiff of the deficiencies in his complaint. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

For the reasons given in the May 31, 2006, order, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.See Local Rule 11-110; 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 Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty 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.


Summaries of

Rush v. Kudlata

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0486 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)
Case details for

Rush v. Kudlata

Case Details

Full title:JOHN ALLEN RUSH, Plaintiff, v. LT. KUDLATA, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Aug 24, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0486 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)