Bennett v. Via Path Technologies, et al.

Bennett · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · July 30, 2025 · No. 2:24-cv-0769-TLN-CKD P

Summary

The magistrate judge recommends dismissing the action without prejudice because the plaintiff did not file an amended complaint or request an extension after the original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. The recommendation is submitted to the assigned district judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and the plaintiff is given fourteen days to file objections.

Holdings

  1. The magistrate judge recommended that the action be dismissed without prejudice because plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or seek an extension after the court-ordered deadline expired.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice when the plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint within the time allowed and did not seek an extension.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (1)

  • Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…