(PC) Daniels v. Monroe/Lienberger Detention Centers et al, No. 2:2014cv02176 - Document 26 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/8/2015 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed as to defendants Castaneda, Yakimtsev, Fristole, and Chan; and plaintiff be permitted to proceed on the original complaint against defendants Torres, Garcia, Galey and Gall. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LANDRY DANIELS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:14-cv-2176 KJM CKD P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS MONROE/LIENBERGER DETENTION CENTERS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff commenced this action on September 19, 2014. (ECF No. 1.) On October 28, 17 18 2014, the undersigned determined that service was appropriate for defendants Torres, Garcia, 19 Galey, and Gall, and recommended that all other defendants be dismissed. (ECF No. 4.) Torres, 20 Garcia, Galey, and Gall have answered the complaint. (ECF Nos. 12-15.) On April 8, 2015, the district judge dismissed the complaint and granted plaintiff leave to 21 22 file an amended complaint in an attempt to state a cognizable claim against defendants Castaneda, 23 Yakimtsev, Fristole, and Chan. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff has been granted multiple extensions of 24 time to file an amended complaint and informed that no further extensions would be granted. 25 (ECF Nos. 19, 22, 25.) The final deadline has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended 26 complaint. 27 //// 28 //// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. This action be dismissed as to defendants Castaneda, Yakimtsev, Fristole, and Chan. 3 4 5 See Local Rule 110; Red. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and 2. Plaintiff be permitted to proceed on the original complaint against defendants Torres, Garcia, Galey, and Gall. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 8 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 9 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 10 Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 11 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 12 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 Dated: December 8, 2015 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 2 / dani2176.fta_fr(3) 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.
