(PC) Andrews v. Russo, et al., No. 2:2018cv02891 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 03/15/19 ORDERING the clerk of court shall randomly assign a District Judge to this case. Also, RECOMMENDING that this case be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders. Assigned and referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 SOLOMON JAMES MICHAEL ANDREWS, Plaintiff, 13 ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. 14 15 No. 2:18-cv-2891 DB P RN RUSSO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action under 18 19 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that defendants failed to provide appropriate medical care. 20 Plaintiff filed his original complaint in October 2018. (ECF No. 1.) On screening, this court 21 found plaintiff stated no claims potentially cognizable under § 1983. (ECF No. 8.) This court 22 gave plaintiff leave to amend. On January 22, 2019, plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. 23 (ECF No. 11.) Again, on screening, this court found no cognizable claims. (Feb. 4, 2019 Order 24 (ECF No. 12).) Plaintiff was given leave to file a second amended complaint. This court also 25 advised plaintiff that if he failed to file a second amended complaint within the thirty days 26 provided or otherwise failed to respond to the court’s order, this court would recommend this 27 action be dismissed. 28 //// 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 More than thirty days have passed since the court issued its February 4, 2019 order and plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint or any other responsive documents. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to randomly assign a district judge to this case. Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders. See E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. These findings and recommendations will be 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, plaintiff may file written objections 10 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings 11 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 12 time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 13 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 14 Dated: March 15, 2019 15 16 17 18 19 DLB:9 DB/prisoner-civil rights/andr2891.fta fr 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.
