United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2025

(PC) Hill v. El Dorado County Sheriff

(PC) Hill v. El Dorado County Sheriff
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided May 13, 2025
(PC) Hill v. El Dorado County Sheriff

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL ALAN DEAN HILL, No. 2:24-cv-2752 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND EL DORADO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants.

17 On March 27, 2025, plaintiff’s amended complaint was dismissed with leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiff was warned that failure to file a second amended complaint before the expiration of the deadline for doing so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. The time for filing a second amended complaint has expired. Plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint.1 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case; and ///// Plaintiff did submit a letter indicating frustration with the court’s March 27, 2025, order. But plaintiff fails to point to anything suggesting dismissal of plaintiff’s amended complaint was improper. This matter cannot proceed on the amended complaint for the reasons identified. If plaintiff desires more time to submit a pleading upon which this action can potentially proceed, he is free to so move. ] IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See | Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

3 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. The 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).

10 D 7) □□ .. oe 4 ated: May 13, 2025 Cardp ft | Lz a. ae D CAROLYNK.DELANEY. SOS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14] 1S 1 16 hill2752.fta

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