(PC) Regaldo v. Mule Creek State Prison Medical Office, No. 2:2009cv00942 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/14/10 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Regaldo v. Mule Creek State Prison Medical Office Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 K. REGALDO, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 No. CIV S-09-0942 FCD EFB P vs. MULE CREEK STATE PRISON MEDICAL OFFICE, 14 Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 / 16 Plaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, suing for alleged civil rights violations. See 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 19, 2010, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a 18 cognizable claim against the defendant. The dismissal order explained the complaint’s 19 deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies, 20 and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation 21 that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 22 The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or 23 otherwise responded to the court’s order. 24 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to 25 state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 26 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 3 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 4 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 5 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 6 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 7 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 Dated: July 14, 2010. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.