(PC) Ruiz v. Curry, No. 1:2017cv01454 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER vacating 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 3/8/2018. (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. J. CURRY, 15 Defendant. 16 Case No. 1:17-cv-01454-DAD-SAB (PC) ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 20, 2018 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS [ECF Nos. 12, 14] Plaintiff Rogelio May Ruiz is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 10, 2018, the Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a cognizable 19 20 claim for relief, and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 21 11.) Plaintiff was warned that if he failed to comply, the Court would recommend that the action be 22 dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Id.) Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. Therefore, on February 20, 2018, the undersigned 23 24 issued Findings and Recommendations recommending dismissal of the action for failure to state a 25 cognizable claim and failure to comply with court order. (ECF No. 12.) On March 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (ECF No. 13.) Then, on March 26 27 6, 2018, Plaintiff filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (ECF No. 14.) 28 /// 1 1 In light of the fact that Plaintiff has now filed an amended complaint, albeit untimely, in the 2 interest of justice the Court will vacate the Findings and Recommendations and screen the amended 3 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A in due course. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the February 20, 2018 (ECF No. 12) Findings and 4 5 Recommendations are VACATED. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: 9 March 8, 2018 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 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.
