Dumont v. CDCR Health Care Tracy et al
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/23/2021 ORDERING Clerk to randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action and RECOMMENDING the complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Assigned and referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RALPH E. DUMONT,
No. 2:18-cv-0101 AC P
CDCR HEALTH CARE TRACY, et al.,
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Upon screening the complaint, the undersigned found that it did not state a claim for relief
and gave plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 17. After plaintiff
failed to file an amended complaint, he was given an additional twenty-one days to do so and
warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this
action be dismissed. ECF No. 18. Plaintiff then filed a notice in which he stated that he received
the order granting him additional time to file an amended complaint and that he “find[s] that a
claim of relief in the amount of $100,000.00 or what the court deems reasonable would be
aceptable [sic].” ECF No. 19. The court advised plaintiff that his notice was not an amended
complaint and extended his deadline to file an amended complaint to April 16, 2021. ECF No.
The deadline for amending the complaint has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an
amended complaint or otherwise responded to the order. In extending the deadline to file an
amended complaint, the court advised plaintiff that if he did not file an amended complaint the
court would assume that he was choosing to stand on the allegations of the original complaint and
would recommend that this action be dismissed for the reasons set forth in the January 19, 2021
Screening Order. Id.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly
assign a United States District Judge to this action.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the complaint be dismissed for failure to state a
claim for the reasons set forth in the January 19, 2021 Screening Order (ECF No. 17).
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 twenty-one days
after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections
with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges 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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153
(9th Cir. 1991).
DATED: April 23, 2021
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?