(PC) Ortiz v. Spearman ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTIAN ORTIZ, No. 2:20-cv-0136 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 MARION E. SPEARMAN, et al,, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 20, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an 18 amended complaint was granted. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not 19 filed an amended complaint. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district 21 court judge to this case; and 22 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 23 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen after 26 being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 27 the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 28 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time wOAIe 2 OU VEY EO NS INES MUO, AI eA eM 1 | waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 2 | 1991). 3 | Dated: May 1, 2020 Po Pg, fF /- Mt. Le 9 4 CAROLYN K. DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8] 4 9 orti0136.fta 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28