(PC) Mills v. Pfeffer ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARRYL RAY MILLS, Case No.: 1:20-cv-00195-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE; AND 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 C. PFEFFER, et al., TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND 15 Defendant. (Doc. 13) 16 FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 17 18 Previously, the Court screened plaintiff’s complaint and found it to be devoid of a cognizable 19 claim. (Doc. 13.) Plaintiff was then granted an opportunity to dismiss the case entirely, file an 20 amended complaint, or elect to stand on the complaint. Plaintiff has filed a response indicating his 21 intention to stand on the complaint. (Doc. 14.) 22 The court therefore ORDERS the Clerk of Court to assign a district judge to this case; and 23 The court RECOMMENDS that the complaint be dismissed with leave to amend for failure 24 to state a claim. 25 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 26 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 27 fourteen days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file 28 1 written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 2 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections 3 within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 4 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: January 27, 2021 /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