(PC) Raouf v. Unknown

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOSEPH RAOUF, No. 2:25-cv-1724 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND UNKNOWN, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendant.

17 On June 24, 2025, plaintiff was ordered to file a complaint. Plaintiff was also ordered to either pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff was granted 30 days to do so. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s June 24, 2025 order.

21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court judge to this case.

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

25 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. 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).

4 | Dated: August 5, 2025 Card ke yy a 5 CAROLYN K DELANEY?

6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9} 1 10 raoul 724 .fta 1]