(PC) Bruister v. Hanson et al, No. 2:2008cv00510 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Leslie E. Kobayashi on 04/07/10 RECOMMENDING that the case be dismissed with prejudice. Objections to these F&Rs due by 05/20/10; referred to Judge David A. Ezra. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
(PC) Bruister v. Hanson et al Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LEWIS BRUISTER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) DENTIST HANSON, ET AL., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________ ) CV 2:08-00510 DAE-LEK FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS CASE WITH PREJUDICE On February 5, 2010, this Court issued its Order Dismissing Amended Complaint Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (“Order”). In the Order, this Court found that Plaintiff Lewis Bruister’s (“Plaintiff”) Amended Complaint, filed on July 2, 2008, failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Court directed Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint by March 16, 2010 and cautioned him that, if he failed to do so, this Court would recommend that the action be dismissed without leave to amend, i.e. with prejudice. Further, the Order stated that such a dismissal would count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff has failed to submit a second amended complaint within the allotted time frame. Plaintiff was duly noticed that failure to comply would result in a dismissal of his action. This Court therefore FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that this case should be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Such dismissal will count as Dockets.Justia.com a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). These findings and recommendation are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Any party may file written objections with the court by May 6, 2010. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed by May 20, 2010. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). IT IS SO FOUND AND RECOMMENDED. DATED AT HONOLULU, HAWAII, April 7, 2010. /S/ Leslie E. Kobayashi Leslie E. Kobayashi United States Magistrate Judge LEWIS BRUISTER V. DENTIST HANSON, ET AL; CIVIL NO. 2:08-00510 DAE-LEK; FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS CASE WITH PREJUDICE 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.