From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Berliner

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 11, 2011
No. CIV S-10-2966 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-2966 GGH P

10-11-2011

PAUL DEMOND SMITH, Plaintiff, v. LAURIE ANN BERLINER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

On December 7, 2010, plaintiff filed his consent to the jurisdiction of the undersigned (docket #8). By order filed November 17, 2010, the court granted plaintiff twenty-eight days to file an amended complaint. In the November 17th order, the court informed plaintiff of the deficiencies in his complaint. Plaintiff filed a notification of a change of address on December 7, 2010 (docket #7) and again on February 17, 2011 (docket #10), and the November 17, 2010 order was reserved to his current address. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

For the reasons given in the November 17, 2010, order, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Gregory G. Hollows

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
de smit2966.fta


Summaries of

Smith v. Berliner

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 11, 2011
No. CIV S-10-2966 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Smith v. Berliner

Case Details

Full title:PAUL DEMOND SMITH, Plaintiff, v. LAURIE ANN BERLINER, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Oct 11, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-10-2966 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)