(PC) Gunn v. Stanton Correctional Facility ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AUMINTRIUS DAMOUR GUNN No. 2:21-cv-00295-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 STANTON CORRECTIONAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FACILITY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 By order filed May 25, 2021, plaintiff’s first amended complaint was dismissed and thirty 19 days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now 20 expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s 21 order. Plaintiff has consented to this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local 22 Rule 302. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign this 24 matter to a district court judge. 25 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 26 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 1 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 2 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 3 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 4 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 5 || (9th Cir. 1991). 6 | Dated: July 8, 2021 / hice ANKE) flo CAROLYNK.DELANEY 4 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 || 12/gunn0295.fta(2).docx 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28