Civitillo v. California Department of Corrections et al
Filing
8
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 08/01/11 ORDERING the clerk of the court shall randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action. U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller randomly assigned to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
JACK CIVITILLO,
11
12
13
Plaintiff,
No. CIV S-11-1111 DAD P
vs.
CALIFORNIA DEP’T OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
ORDER AND
14
Defendants.
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
15
/
16
17
By order filed May 10, 2011, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days
18
leave to file an amended complaint was granted. In addition, plaintiff’s in forma pauperis
19
application was incomplete and plaintiff was ordered to file a new application within thirty days.
20
The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint and in
21
forma pauperis application or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1
22
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
23
1. That the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States
24
District Judge to this action.
25
1
26
On June 20, 2011, the court’s May 10, 2011 order was reserved on plaintiff’s new
address of record.
1
1
2
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
4
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen
5
days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written
6
objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s
7
Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served
8
within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file
9
objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.
10
Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
11
DATED: August 1, 2011.
12
13
14
DAD:4
civi1111.fta&ifp
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?