(PS) Atsbaha v. Barr

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 20202:19-cv-01462California341 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MULUGETA ATSBAHA, No. 2:19-cv-1462 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY

GENERAL,

15 Defendant. 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By order signed November 14, 2019, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The twenty-eight-day period has expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order in any manner. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be…

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.