Cooper

Dustin Thomas Gordon v. Jim Cooper, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20252:24-cv-02741California371 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 DUSTIN THOMAS GORDON, 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:24-cv-2741 TLN CSK P 13 v. 14 JIM COOPER, et al., ORDER 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Dustin Thomas Gordon (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this 18 civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 1, 2025, the magistrate judge dismissed Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and 21 ordered Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 18 at 8.) 22 Thirty days passed and Plaintiff did not submit anything to the Court. Accordingly, on June 12, 23 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations recommending the Court dismiss 24 the action without prejudice. (ECF No. 19.) The findings and recommendations were served on 25 Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen days. (Id. at 2.) 26 This…

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.