(PC) Colston v. Vorkulin ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 KORAN MALCOM COLSTON, No. 2:21-cv-00542 DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 V. VORKULIN, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. By order dated November 23, 2021, the court found the complaint had stated a 18 cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim against defendants Vorkulin and Guerrero but 19 failed to state any other cognizable claim. (ECF No. 8.) The court ordered plaintiff to file notice 20 informing the court whether he wished to proceed on his cognizable claims or be given leave to 21 file an amended complaint. (Id. at 11.) Plaintiff was given thirty days leave to file such a notice. 22 (Id.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to abide by the court’s order would result in a 23 recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 More than thirty days have passed and plaintiff has not filed notice of how he wishes to 2 | proceed with the court, filed an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or otherwise 3 | responded to the court’s orders.! Accordingly, it will be recommended that this action be 4 | dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and failure to prosecute. 5 For the reasons state above, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign a 6 | district judge to this action. 7 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 8 || Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 9 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 10 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within twenty-one days 11 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 12 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 13 | to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 14 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 15 | Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 | Dated: May 18, 2022 17 18 19 BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 DB:14 24 DB/DB Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/R/cols0542.fr.dism 25 2 | ———... > . The court’s November 23, 2021 order was returned as undeliverable to the address plaintiff 27 | provided to the court. Plaintiff is under a continuing duty to update the court as to his current address. L.R. 182(f). Plaintiff has failed to notify the court of a change of address within the 28 | time period described in Local Rule 183(b).