(PC) Green v. Walker et al, No. 2:2007cv02487 - Document 25 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: [VACATED PURSUANT TO 27 ORDER] FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/04/09 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 20 days.(Plummer, M) Modified on 1/29/2010 (Yin, K).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Green v. Walker et al Doc. 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LONZELL GREEN, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-07-2487 LKK DAD P vs. JAMES WALKER, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 On July 1, 2009, the court issued findings and recommendations, recommending 17 dismissal of this action due to plaintiff’s failure to file a second amended complaint within the 18 time provided by the court. On July 13, 2009, plaintiff timely filed objections to the findings and 19 recommendations. On September 21, 2009, the court vacated its findings and recommendations 20 and granted plaintiff a final thirty-day extension of time in which to file a second amended 21 complaint. Plaintiff was admonished that failure to do so would result in a recommendation for 22 dismissal of this action. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a 23 second amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed 25 without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 26 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 2 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty 3 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 4 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 5 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 6 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 7 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 DATED: November 4, 2009. 9 10 11 12 DAD:lg gree2487.fta(2) 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.
