1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA S. FURLONG, No. 2:24-cv-0375 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 SHASTA COUNTY SHERIFF’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DEPARTMENT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed October 30, 2024, plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint 18 within thirty days. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended 19 complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 20 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff 21 was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current 22 address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of 23 the party is fully effective. 24 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a district court judge be randomly assigned to this matter. 25 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 26 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(l). Within fourteen after 1 | being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 2 || the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 3 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 4 | waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst,

(9th Cir. 5 | 1991). 6 | DATED: December 18, 2024 * Lhar—e_ 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28