(PS) Burton, et al v. Department of Defense, et al, No. 2:2010cv01698 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/15/11 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice re 1 Complaint filed by Josh Burton, Wendy Sher. Objections to F&R due w/in 21 days.(Matson, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Burton, et al v. Department of Defense, et al Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSH BURTON and WENDY SHER, 11 Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-10-1698 JAM DAD PS 12 vs. 13 14 15 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants, 16 / 17 By order signed March 7, 2011, plaintiffs’ pro se complaint was dismissed with 18 leave to file an amended complaint that cures the defects noted in the order and complies with 19 applicable rules. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days from the date of the order to file their 20 amended complaint and were cautioned that failure to respond to the order in a timely manner 21 may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. In addition, the order directed 22 each plaintiff to file a legible motion to proceed in forma pauperis along with any amended 23 complaint. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiffs have not responded to the 24 court’s order in any manner. 25 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States 2 District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 3 twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file 4 written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections 5 to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiffs are advised that failure to file 6 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 7 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 DATED: April 15, 2011. 9 10 11 12 DAD:kw Ddad1\orders.pro se\burton1698.fta 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.
