(PC) Biagas v. State of California ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VINCENT JAMES BIAGAS, SR., No. 2:21-cv-2242 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 This case was opened on December 6, 2021, on the basis of a declaration that plaintiff 18 submitted to the court regarding his treatment in prison. ECF No. 1. On December 9, 2021, 19 plaintiff was ordered to file a complaint and submit either an application to proceed in forma 20 pauperis or the filing fee. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff was given thirty days to comply with the order 21 and cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 22 Id. at 2. After plaintiff failed to comply, he was given an additional twenty-one days to do so and 23 warned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed, 24 without further warning. ECF No. 4. Twenty-one days have now passed, and plaintiff has not 25 filed a complaint, submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis or the filing fee, or 26 otherwise responded to the court’s order. 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to 28 randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. ] IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 2 | L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 5 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 6 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 7 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 8 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 9 || Court’s order. Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 || DATED: March 8, 2022 . . 1] Cthten— Lape ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28