From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Bick

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 30, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1425 TLN CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 30, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-1425 TLN CKD P

05-30-2017

JOSH THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. JOSH BICK, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On September 1, 2016, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed with leave to file an amended complaint. At plaintiff's request, the court has granted three extensions of time for plaintiff to comply. The most recent extension required plaintiff's amended complaint to be filed by May 17, 2017. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint nor explained why not. 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 30, 2017

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1
thom1425.fta


Summaries of

Thomas v. Bick

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 30, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-1425 TLN CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 30, 2017)
Case details for

Thomas v. Bick

Case Details

Full title:JOSH THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. JOSH BICK, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: May 30, 2017

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-1425 TLN CKD P (E.D. Cal. May. 30, 2017)