(PC)Lopez v. CDC Director ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL LOPEZ, No. 2:21-cv-02094 AC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER and FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CDC DIRECTOR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed January 10, 2024, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended 18 complaint. Thirty days from that date have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended 19 complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a 21 district judge to this action. 22 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 23 Local Rule 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 fourteen 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. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 || DATED: February 28, 2024 ~ 4 Hhttrn— Mare ALLISON CLAIRE 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28