(PC) Shannon v. Tapiz et al, No. 2:2022cv01504 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/19/2023 ORDERING the Clerk to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action and RECOMMENDING the second amended complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the 5/24/2023 Screening Order. Assigned and referred to Judge Dale A. Drozd; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Shannon v. Tapiz et al Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL TYRONE SHANNON, 12 No. 2:22-cv-1504 AC P Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 J. TAPIZ, et al., 15 ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. 16 By order filed May 24, 2023, the second amended complaint was screened and found to 17 18 not state a claim for relief. ECF No. 13. Plaintiff was given thirty days to file an amended 19 complaint and cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be 20 dismissed. Id. at 5-6. Plaintiff has been afforded multiple extensions of time to amend the 21 complaint and failed to do so. ECF Nos. 15, 17, 19. In granting the most recent request for an 22 extension of time, plaintiff was warned that no further extensions would be granted absent a 23 showing of extraordinary cause. ECF No. 19. The deadline for filing an amended complaint has 24 now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the 25 court’s order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 26 27 assign a United States District Judge to this action. 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the second amended complaint be dismissed for 2 failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the May 24, 2023 Screening Order (ECF No. 3 13). See L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 6 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 7 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 8 to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 9 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 DATED: December 19, 2023 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.
