-EFB (PC) Kibunguchy v. Sacramento County Police Department et al, No. 2:2009cv02478 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 01/31/11 ORDERING the clerk randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case. U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell randomly assigned to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)

Download PDF
-EFB (PC) Kibunguchy v. Sacramento County Police Department et al Doc. 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRIS WAMALWA KIBUNGUCHY, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-09-2478 EFB P vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 Defendants. 15 / 16 17 Plaintiff, an inmate confined at Atascadero State Hospital, proceeds without counsel in an 18 action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 14, 2010, the court dismissed plaintiff’s 19 complaint for failure to state a cognizable claim. 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 for failure to state a claim. 23 24 The 30-day period has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1 25 1 26 On December 15, 2010, plaintiff filed a letter with the court. The letter is wholly unresponsive to the December 14 order and appears would have been mailed before the court 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case. Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 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: January 31, 2011. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 issued its order. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.