Cueva

(PC) Deegan v. Cueva

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 17, 20242:23-cv-01130California244 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SIDNEY ROSS DEEGAN, JR., No. 2:23-cv-1130 DJC CKD Plaintiff, v. DANIEL E. CUEVA, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 On February 9, 2024, plaintiff’s second amended complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. The third amended complaint was due May 31, 2024, and plaintiff has not filed a third amended complaint. 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. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified ///// 28 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.