(PC) Ausborn v. CHCF

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RANDY AUSBORN, No. 2:19-cv-2220 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND CHCF, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants.

17 On March 19, 2020, plaintiff’s pleadings were dismissed and thirty days leave to file a fourth amended complaint was granted. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a fourth amended complaint.

20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case; and 22 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time WOAIe GAD □□□ VEAINT NINES MUTI op PO MI eNO oN | waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. | 1991).

3 | Dated: May 1, 2020 Lad | Cardp. k. □□□ CAROLYN K. DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8] 4 ausb2220.fta