(PC) Barela v. Stockton Police Department

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 27, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-01209·Unknown

Opinion

OSCAR BARELA, No. 2:22-cv-01209 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant.

By order filed January 23, 2023, the court found plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a claim and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The time granted has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s 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, plaintiff 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.” 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). Dated: March 24, 2023 pes ‘BORAH BARNES are 1208.fta UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Barela v. Stockton Police Department, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

(PC) Barela v. Stockton Police Department ((PC) Barela v. Stockton Police Department) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related