Yap

(PS) Conerly v. Yap

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 27, 20212:21-cv-01132California595 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CARINA CONERLY, No. 2:21-cv-01132-TLN-CKD PS Plaintiff,

ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND

v. RECOMMENDATIONS; JULIE G. YAP, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant. 16 Plaintiff proceeds pro se in this action, which was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(3). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By order dated July 26, 2021, the undersigned screened plaintiff’s complaint and notified plaintiff the complaint was subject to dismissal for failure to state a valid claim for relief. (ECF No. 4.) Although the undersigned noted that it appeared that plaintiff might not be able to state a valid claim premised on the events described in the complaint, out of caution, plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. On September 16, 2021, having received no amended complaint or other communication from plaintiff, the undersigned…

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.