(PC) Azevedo v. Ehlers

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PETER AZEVEDO, No. 2: 21-cv-1554 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS R. EHLERS, 15 Defendant.

17 By an order filed September 2, 2021, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file a completed in forma pauperis affidavit and a certified copy of his prison trust account statement, and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

20 On September 13, 2021, the September 2, 2021 order was returned unserved. On September 15, 2021, the September 2, 2021 order was re-served at plaintiff’s last known address.

22 Thirty days passed from September 15, 2021, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order and has not filed the required documents.

24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and 26 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

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 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).

6 | Dated: October 21, 2021 Foci) Aharon 8 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ° Az1554.fifp 1]