(PC) Matthes v. Solano County Detention Facilities, No. 2:2013cv00045 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/25/13 ORDERING the clerk assign this case to a District Judge. U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley randomly assigned to this case. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 21 days. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Matthes v. Solano County Detention Facilities Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD MATTHEW, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:13-cv-45 AC P v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS SOLANO COUNTY DETENTION FACILITIES, Defendant. 16 17 By order filed April 8, 2013, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed with leave to amend 18 19 within twenty eight days. On July 11, 2013 and September 20, 2013, plaintiff was granted two 20 additional extensions of time up to and including October 25, 2013 in which to file an amended 21 complaint. That deadline has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or 22 otherwise responded to the court’s order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk assign this case to a district 23 24 25 26 27 28 judge. Accordingly, 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 twenty-one days 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 2 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 3 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 4 time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 5 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 DATED: November 25, 2013 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.