From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Brockway

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 26, 2023
2:22-cv-1932 DAD KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-1932 DAD KJN P

01-26-2023

GARY PAUL SMITH, Plaintiff, v. BROCKWAY, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

By order filed December 16, 2022, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within thirty days, why his action should not be terminated because it was improvidently opened as a new case. The twenty-one day period expired, and plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court's order.

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).


Summaries of

Smith v. Brockway

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 26, 2023
2:22-cv-1932 DAD KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2023)
Case details for

Smith v. Brockway

Case Details

Full title:GARY PAUL SMITH, Plaintiff, v. BROCKWAY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jan 26, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-1932 DAD KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2023)