(PC) Prout v. Unknown ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NICHOLAS RAYMOND PROUT, No. 2:24-cv-2159 CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER & FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 UNKNOWN, 15 Defendant. 16 17 By order filed August 15, 2024, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file a complaint and an 18 application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 8.) Thirty days from that date have now 19 passed, and plaintiff has not filed a complaint or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall assign a district judge to 21 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 4 | Dated: September 20, 2024 A CAn Spo \L CHI SOO KIM 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 | praiso.ta 10 | > 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28