(PS) Smith v. Sacramento Sheriff Department, No. 2:2010cv02560 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/23/11 Recommending that this action be dismissed re 1 . These findings and recommendations will be submitted to U.S District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
(PS) Smith v. Sacramento Sheriff Department Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH A. SMITH, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-10-2560 MCE DAD PS vs. SACRAMENTO SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / By order signed May 17, 2011, plaintiff’s pro se complaint was dismissed with 17 leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. Plaintiff was 18 granted thirty days from the date of the order to file an amended complaint and was cautioned 19 that failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner may result in a recommendation 20 that this action be dismissed. The thirty-day period has expired, and plaintiff has not responded 21 to the court’s order in any manner. 22 23 24 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 will be submitted to the United States 25 District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 26 fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections 2 to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 3 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 4 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 DATED: June 23, 2011. 6 7 8 9 DAD:kw Ddad1\orders.pro se\smith2560.fta 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.