From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Auld

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 8, 2021
2:21-cv-1379 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-1379 JAM KJN P

11-08-2021

MICHAEL SHANE SMITH, Plaintiff, v. AULD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

By order filed September 16, 2021, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint. Thirty days from that date have now passed, 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 and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 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).


Summaries of

Smith v. Auld

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 8, 2021
2:21-cv-1379 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021)
Case details for

Smith v. Auld

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL SHANE SMITH, Plaintiff, v. AULD, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 8, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-1379 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021)