Valenzuela v. Thorntona

Summary

The magistrate judge recommends dismissing Mario A. Valenzuela’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice because he failed to file a second amended complaint after the first amended complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim. The findings and recommendations advise the parties of the fourteen-day period for filing objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Holdings

1. The court recommended that the action be dismissed without prejudice because plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint or otherwise respond after receiving an opportunity to cure the deficiencies identified in the first amended complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice after plaintiff failed to file a second amended complaint or otherwise comply with the court's screening order.

Disposition

other