-DAD (PC) Civitillo v. California Department of Corrections et al, No. 2:2011cv01111 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/7/11 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice; referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
-DAD (PC) Civitillo v. California Department of Corrections et al Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JACK CIVITILLO, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-11-1111 KJM DAD P vs. CALIFORNIA DEP’T OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 14 Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 / 16 17 By an order filed August 24, 2011, the court vacated findings and 18 recommendations that were filed on August 2, 20111, and plaintiff was provided another 19 opportunity to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or to pay the $350.00 filing fee, and to file an 20 amended complaint pursuant to the court’s May 10, 2011 order. Plaintiff was cautioned that 21 failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day 22 period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order, has not filed an in 23 forma pauperis affidavit or paid the appropriate filing fee, or filed an amended complaint. 24 25 26 1 In the August 2, 2011 findings and recommendations, the court recommended that the action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to file an amended complaint and a new in forma pauperis application. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 4 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 5 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 6 objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 7 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections 8 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 9 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 DATED: September 7, 2011. 11 12 13 DAD:4 civi1111.fifp.fta 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.