United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2021

(PC) Rodriguez v. Ralph Diaz

(PC) Rodriguez v. Ralph Diaz
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided October 13, 2021
(PC) Rodriguez v. Ralph Diaz

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOHNATHAN C. RODRIGUEZ, No. 2:20-cv-1650 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS RALPH DIAZ, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 By order filed July 19, 2021 the undersigned adopted the April 13, 2020 Screening Order (ECF No. 10), which was issued by a magistrate judge in the Central District of California, and found that the complaint did not state a claim for relief. ECF No. 17. Plaintiff was given thirty days to file an amended complaint and cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. at 2. After plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint, he was given an additional twenty-one days to amend the complaint and warned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without further warning. ECF No. 18. Twenty-one days have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action.

28 //// ] IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the complaint be dismissed for failure to state a | claim for the reasons set forth in the April 13, 2020 Screening Order (ECF No. 10). See L.R. || 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

4 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)(1). Within fourteen days || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 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).

11 | DATED: October 12, 2021 ~ 12 Chthwen— Clare ALLISON CLAIRE 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.