(PC) Dailey v. Martel, et al,, No. 2:2009cv03024 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/13/2010 ORDERING the clerk to randomly assign a US Distric Judge; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed w/out prejudice. Assigned and Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections due w/in 21 days.(Yin, K)
Download PDF
(PC) Dailey v. Martel, et al, Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES EDWARD DAILEY, 11 12 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-3024 DAD P vs. MICHAEL MARTEL, et al., ORDER AND Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / By order filed August 5, 2010, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days 17 leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and 18 plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 19 20 21 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign this case to a U.S. District Judge. Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 24 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty- 25 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 26 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 2 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 3 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 DATED: September 13, 2010. 5 6 7 8 DAD:4 dail3024.fta 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2