(PC) Cortez v. Solano County Sheriff's Office ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LORENZO MATEO CORTEZ, No. 2:20-cv-0392 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SOLANO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 By order filed March 30, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and sixty days leave to 19 file an amended complaint was granted. Sixty days from that date have now passed, and plaintiff 20 has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 21 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 22 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 23 Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 24 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 28 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 2 CUVEE YOU FP RINUINGIN MUUEIEIOCTI PR ee AY eT 1 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 2 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 3 | Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (th Cir. 1991). 4 | Dated: June 23, 2020 Fens Arn 6 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE jcon0392.fta 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28