(HC) Ojo v. Warden

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OLANREWAJU TUNDE OJO, No. 2:23-cv-1096 KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WARDEN, FCI-HERLONG, 15 Respondents.

17 By order filed November 28, 2023, petitioner was ordered to show cause, within thirty days, why this action should not be dismissed. The thirty day period has expired, and petitioner has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

20 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 22 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

24 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, any party 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.” Any response to the | objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The || parties are 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).

4 | Dated: January 3, 2024 Foci) Aharon 6 KENDALL J. NE ojo 1096.fsc UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]