(PC) Johnson v. Mata et al, No. 2:2022cv00613 - Document 69 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/10/2023 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Dale A. Drozd. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations.(Lopez, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Johnson v. Mata et al Doc. 69 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL JOHNSON, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:22-cv-0613 DAD KJN P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LT. J. MATA, et al., Defendants. 16 17 On April 10, 2023, defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment claims was 18 granted. (ECF No. 61.) By order filed September 1, 2023, plaintiff was ordered to complete and 19 file an election form indicating whether he chose to dismiss his putative Eighth Amendment 20 claims or whether he would file an amended complaint and provide his proposed amended 21 complaint. The thirty day period expired, and plaintiff has not filed his election form or 22 otherwise responded to the court’s order. 23 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff 24 was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current 25 address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of 26 the party is fully effective. 27 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 3 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 4 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 5 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 6 specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 7 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 Dated: October 10, 2023 9 10 /john0613.fta 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.
