(PC) Foote v. El Dorado Sheriff's Dept. et al

Filing 13

ORDER FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 02/05/24 DIRECTING the Clerk to randomly assign a District Judge. Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller added to case. It is further RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice. New Case Number: 2:23-cv-0938 KJM FEB (PC) Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Licea Chavez, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DYLAN R. FOOTE,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

EL DORADO SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, et al.,

15

17

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

Defendants.

16

18

No. 2:23-cv-00938-EFB (PC)

Plaintiff, a county jail inmate, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
On October 30, 2023, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A. ECF No. 11. The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and granted
plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. Id. The
screening order warned plaintiff that failure to comply could result in a recommendation that this
action be dismissed. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended
complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1 Thus, it appears that plaintiff is unable or
1

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff was
properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address
at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the
1

1
2
3
4

unwilling to cure the defects in the complaint.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a district judge to
this action.
Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice for the

5

reasons stated in the October 30, 2023 screening order, and that plaintiff’s pending motion (ECF

6

No. 10, requesting subpoenas) be denied as moot.

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

12

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The

13

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

14

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez

15

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

16
17

Dated: February 5, 2024

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

party is fully effective.
2