Leroy Veal v. CAL/PIA Meat Plant Supervisor

Summary

The court recommends dismissing Leroy Veal’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice because he failed to file an amended complaint after the court dismissed his original complaint with leave to amend. The order also directs the clerk to randomly assign a district judge and explains the procedure and deadline for filing objections to the findings and recommendations.

Holdings

1. Because plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise respond after being given leave to amend and warned that noncompliance could result in dismissal, the magistrate judge recommended that the action be dismissed without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice after plaintiff failed to amend his complaint or otherwise respond to an order granting leave to amend.
2. Whether the matter should proceed as a recommendation to the assigned district judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Disposition

other