The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 RONNIE CHEROKEE BROWN, No. 2: 19-cv-0699 KJN P
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER & FINDINGS &
RECOMMENDATIONS
14 R. PLESHCHUK, et al.,
15 Defendants.
16
17 By order filed June 11, 2019, plaintiff was granted thirty days to either file an amended
18 complaint or return the forms necessary for service of defendants Pleschuk and Valencia as to
19 plaintiff’s Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. (ECF No. 7.) Thirty days from that date
20 have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or returned the forms for
21 service of defendants Pleschuk and Valencia.
22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall appoint a
23 district judge to this action; and
24 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See
25 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections
1 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
2 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that
3 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District
4 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
5 | Dated: October 18, 2019
° Fens Arn
7 KENDALL J. NE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
Br699.fta
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28