(PS) Peterson v. Parkash, No. 2:2018cv00514 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/29/18 Recommending that this action 1 Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to these F&Rs due within fourteen days. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK PETERSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:18-cv-0514 TLN DB PS v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATINS RAM PARKASH, 15 Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in 17 18 accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By order filed June 1, 2018, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted 19 20 leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. (ECF No. 5.) 21 Plaintiff was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint 22 and was specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner 23 would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The twenty-eight day period has 24 expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order in any manner. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 25 26 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 //// 28 //// 1 1 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 3 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 4 with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections to Magistrate 5 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within 6 the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 7 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 Dated: October 29, 2018 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DLB:6 DB/orders/orders.pro se/peterson0514.fta.f&rs 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.