(PC) Eckland v. Dunn

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD RAY ECKLUND, No. 2:18-cv-1979 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DUNN, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20 On October 6, 2021, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma pauperis affidavit, and he was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See ECF No. 9. At that time, plaintiff was given thirty days within which to comply.

23 See id. at 2. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed the required document, nor has he responded to the court’s order in any way.

25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a District Court Judge to this case.

27 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice.

28 //// ] 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 twenty-one days || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections || with the court. 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 | (th Cir. 1991).

8 || DATED: November 12, 2021 ~ 9 Chee ALLISON CLAIRE 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE