(PC)Timothy W. Arnett v. Ament et al, No. 1:2006cv00324 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2008)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 13 ; ORDER Dismissing Action signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/3/2008. CASE CLOSED.(Esteves, C)

Download PDF
(PC)Timothy W. Arnett v. Ament et al Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TIMOTHY ARNETT, 12 1:06-cv-00324-LJO-DLB-P ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 13) Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 MARC AMENT, et al., ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 15 Defendants. / 16 17 Plaintiff, Timothy Arnett (“plaintiff”), is a federal 18 prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 19 rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of 20 Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 21 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 22 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 23 The matter was On December 13, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings 24 and Recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and 25 which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 26 Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty (20) 27 days. 28 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections to the 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2 § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a 3 de novo review of this case. 4 entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to 5 be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. 8 Having carefully reviewed the The Findings and Recommendations, filed December 13, 2007, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and, 9 2. This action is DISMISSED based on plaintiff’s failure 10 to obey the court’s order of October 1, 2007. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: b9ed48 February 3, 2008 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.