(PC) Price v. Ebler ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 IMMANUEL CHRISTIAN PRICE, No. 2:17-cv-2020 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 EBLER, 15 Defendant. 16 17 By order filed April 21, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed for failure to state a 18 claim and plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 13. On June 19 10, 2020, after plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint, he was granted an additional twenty- 20 one days in which to do so. ECF No. 14. Twenty-one days from that date have now expired, and 21 plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 23 assign a United States District Judge to this action. 24 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 25 L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections wOAOe Ct PUN VEAINIT ENN RAMU tI rete PAY ee 1 | with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 2 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 3 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 4 | (9th Cir. 1991). 5 || DATED: July 20, 2020 ~ 6 Chtten— Lhane ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28