Ardell v. Sacramento Sheriff's Department et al

Filing 7

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/19/12 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case. It is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

KENNETH SMITH ARDELL,
Plaintiff,

11
vs.

12
13
14

No. 2:12-cv-2488 EFB P

SACRAMENTO SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, et al.,

ORDER AND
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Defendants.

15

/

16
17

Plaintiff proceeds pro se with this civil action. This proceeding was referred to this court

18

by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On October 17, 2012, the court dismissed

19

plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend. The dismissal order explained the complaint’s

20

deficiencies, gave plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint correcting those deficiencies,

21

and warned plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation

22

that this action be dismissed.
The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or

23
24

otherwise responded to the court’s order.

25

////

26

////
1

1
2
3
4

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a
United States District Judge to this case.
Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED. Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110, 183(b).

5

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

6

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

7

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

8

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

9

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

10

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

11

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

12

Dated: November 19, 2012.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2