Opinion
No. 2:15-cv-0639 TLN KJN P
07-17-2015
RONNIE STERLING LACY, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Defendants.
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
By order filed June 1, 2015, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Thirty days from that date have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order.
On June 19, 2015, plaintiff filed a declaration in support of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff's declaration appears to be signed May 13, 2015, and is accompanied by a proof of service dated April 25, 2015 (ECF No. 11 at 6, 5). In any event, plaintiff did not provide an amended complaint or address the June 1, 2015 screening order. --------
Accordingly, 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)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 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). Dated: July 17, 2015
/s/_________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
lacy0639.fta