Hearne v. Baughman et al

Filing 12

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 9/25/2017 ORDERING Clerk of Court to randomly assign a US District Judge to this action and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Assigned and referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHNNY HEARNE, 12 No. 2:16-cv-1357 DB P Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 DAVID BAUGHMAN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights 17 18 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that during a visit to the medical facility at 19 California State Prison, Sacramento (CSP-Sac), he was placed in a holding cage reserved for 20 administrative segregation for two hours until the medical staff had time to see him. (ECF No. 1 21 at 2, 4.) The court previously granted plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and 22 dismissed the complaint with leave to amend for failure to state a cognizable claim, as the 23 complaint did not state the legal basis on which he was pursuing this action. (ECF No. 11.) On 24 March 22, 2017, plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the 25 screening order. (Id.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amended complaint or otherwise 26 respond to the screening order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for 27 failure to prosecute. 28 //// 1 1 The 30 day deadline has long since passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended 2 complaint. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a 3 United States District Judge to this action. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 4 dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 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, plaintiff may file written objections 8 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 9 and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen 10 days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 11 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 12 Dated: September 25, 2017 13 14 15 16 17 18 TIM-DLB:10 DB / ORDERS / ORDERS.PRISONER.CIVIL RIGHTS / hear.1357.dismiss.fr 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?