Naranjo

(PC) Wright v. Naranjo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 7, 20252:24-cv-02983California297 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEWAYNE A. WRIGHT, No. 2:24-cv-2983 CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 OFFICER J. NARANJO, 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed April 9, 2025, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and thirty days leave to 18 file an amended complaint was granted. On May 14, 2025, plaintiff was granted an additional 19 thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. Thirty days from that date have now expired, 20 and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 21 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 22 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 23 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 24 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). …

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.