(PC) Gunn v. Stanton Correctional Facility

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AUMINTRIUS DAMOUR GUNN No. 2:21-cv-00295-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND STANTON CORRECTIONAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FACILITY, et al., Defendants.

18 By order filed May 25, 2021, plaintiff’s first amended complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Plaintiff has consented to this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 302.

23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign this matter to a district court judge.

25 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

27 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 days | 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 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 || (9th Cir. 1991).

6 | Dated: July 8, 2021 / hice ANKE) flo CAROLYNK.DELANEY 4 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] || 12/gunn0295.fta(2).docx