(PC) Kutterer v. Facility Wellpath Medical

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 13, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-02970·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 MARCUS KUTTERER, No. 2:23-cv-2970 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 FACILITY WELLPATH MEDICAL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 By order filed February 6, 2024, plaintiff’s amended complaint was dismissed and thirty 19 days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. Thirty days from that date have now 20 passed, and plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the 21 court’s order. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 23 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 | Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: March 12, 2024 Cad □ ht fa he 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 || Kutt2970.fta 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

(PC) Kutterer v. Facility Wellpath Medical, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

(PC) Kutterer v. Facility Wellpath Medical ((PC) Kutterer v. Facility Wellpath Medical) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related