-JFM (PC) Taylor v. Monroe Detention Center et al, No. 2:2011cv00460 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 5/13/11 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign this action to a United States District Judge; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Dillon, M)

Download PDF
-JFM (PC) Taylor v. Monroe Detention Center et al Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT A. TAYLOR, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. 2:11-cv-0460 JFM (PC) vs. MONROE DETENTION CENTER, et al., ORDER AND 14 Defendants. 15 16 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / By order filed March 28, 2011, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days 17 leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and 18 plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 19 20 21 22 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign this action to a United States District Judge; and 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 are submitted to the United States District 24 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 25 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 26 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served 2 within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 3 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 4 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 DATED: May 13, 2011. 6 7 8 9 10 12 tayl0460.fta 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.