(PC)Erving v. CDCR et al, No. 2:2014cv02670 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/9/15 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
(PC)Erving v. CDCR et al Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALBERT ERVING, JR., 12 13 14 No. 2:14-cv-2670 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CDCR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this action commenced November 14, 18 2014. By order filed April 24, 2015, this court dismissed plaintiff’s original pleading and granted 19 plaintiff leave to file, within thirty days, an amended pleading framed either as a civil rights 20 complaint or a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See ECF No. 7. The court deferred ruling on 21 plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis until such time that the court could determine 22 whether this action would proceed in civil rights or habeas. Plaintiff was informed that “[f]ailure 23 to timely file an amended pleading will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed 24 without prejudice.” Id. at 7. More than thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has not responded 25 to the court’s order. 26 27 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 2 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 3 with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 4 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 5 time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 6 (9th Cir. 1991). 7 DATED: June 9, 2015 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 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.