(PC) Harris v. California Forensic Medical Group et al
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 04/26/21 ORDERING the Clerk of Court to randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 30 days.(Plummer, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANTOINE W. HARRIS,
No. 2:19-cv-02020 DB P
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL
GROUP, et al.,
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants acted with negligence and committed medical
malpractice. By order dated October 15, 2020, the court screened the complaint and determined
it did not contain any cognizable claims. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff was given sixty days leave to file
an amended complaint and warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a
recommendation that this action be dismissed. (ECF No. 6 at 13.) On October 30, 2020, plaintiff
filed notice of change of address. (ECF No. 9.) The court’s October 15, 2020 order was re23
served on the plaintiff on November 2, 2020.
Sixty days have passed from the re-service of the court’s October 15, 2020 order. Plaintiff
has not filed an amended complaint, requested additional time to file an amended complaint, or
otherwise responded to the court’s order. Accordingly, the court will recommend that this action
be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders.
For the reasons state above, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign a
district judge to this action.
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See
Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
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 thirty days after
being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with
the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
DATED: April 26, 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?