(PC) Peterson v. Alameda County Sheriff Dept. et al, No. 2:2023cv00218 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/14/2023 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a US District Judge to this case, and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta and Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan assigned for all further proceedings. Referred to District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. New Case Number: 2:23-cv-0218-DJC-EFB (PC). (Huang, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Peterson v. Alameda County Sheriff Dept. et al Doc. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARY LEE PETERSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:23-cv-00218-EFB (PC) v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEP’T, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a county jail inmate proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 17 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 7, 2023, the court found that plaintiff had failed to submit a certified 19 trust account statement in support of his application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF 20 No. 6. Accordingly, the court directed plaintiff to submit the certified trust account statement 21 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) within thirty days. Id. The court also warned plaintiff that 22 failure to do so would result in this action being dismissed. Id. The time for acting has now 23 passed and plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, submitted the required trust account statement, or 24 otherwise responded to the court’s order. 1 25 ///// 26 1 27 28 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case. 3 Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 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, any party may file written 7 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 9 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 10 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 11 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 12 v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 14 Dated: April 14, 2023. 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.
