From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Parker v. Rohlfing

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 10, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-1229 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-1229 CKD P

07-10-2012

RICHARD A. PARKER, Plaintiff, v. DR. J. ROHLFING, Defendant.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed May 25, 2012, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall assign a district judge to this case.

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 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

____________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Parker v. Rohlfing

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 10, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-1229 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2012)
Case details for

Parker v. Rohlfing

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD A. PARKER, Plaintiff, v. DR. J. ROHLFING, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 10, 2012

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-1229 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2012)