(PC) Craig v. Pierson ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NORMAN JOHN CRAIG, No. 2:22-cv-0708 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 VERNON R. PIERSON, 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed November 8, 2022 (ECF No. 5), plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and 18 thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The time period granted has expired, 19 and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 20 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is 21 directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 22 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 23 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 || Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: January 11, 2023 4 5 6 10708. fta.fr BORAH BARNES one UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28