(PC) Ruiz v. Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE ALFONSO RUIZ, Case No. 1:20-cv-00179-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE; 13 v. AND 14 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, et FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS al., TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH 15 LEAVE TO AMEND Defendants. 16 (Doc. 1) 17 FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 18 On July 30, 2020, the Court screened plaintiff’s complaint and found it to be devoid of a 19 cognizable claim. (Doc. 8.) Plaintiff was then directed to file either a first amended complaint curing 20 the deficiencies identified by the Court in the order, a notice of voluntary dismissal, or a notice of 21 election to stand on the complaint. After several requests for extension of time, Plaintiff has now 22 filed a response indicating his intent to stand on the complaint. (Doc. 10.) Accordingly, the Court 23 ORDERS: 24 1. The Clerk of Court to assign a district judge to this case; and 25 2. The Court RECOMMENDS that the complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. 26 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file written objections 1 with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 2 Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 3 may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 4 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: December 4, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 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