Opinion

(PC) Smith v. Parole Board

Court
District Court, E.D. California
Filed
Sep 24, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.5%

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

10 ANTHONY X. SMITH, No. 2:19-cv-2454 DB P

11 Plaintiff,

12 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

13 PAROLE BOARD, et al.,

14 Defendants.

15

16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

17 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims his rights have been violated because he has not received a parole

18 hearing.

19 By order dated May 22, 2020, the first amended complaint was dismissed for failure to

20 state a claim. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff given sixty days to file a second amended complaint.

21 Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amended complaint may result in a recommendation

22 that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 7.) The time to file an amended complaint has passed, and

23 plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, requested additional time to file an amended

24 complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Because plaintiff has failed to file an

25 amended complaint and failed to comply with the court’s order, the court will recommend that

26 this action be dismissed.

27 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign this action to a

28 district judge.

wOASe 2 ADM ETT PRIN ED MVOC Sor POC eT er AYO eT

1 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Local Rule 110;

2 | Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days

5 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

6 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

7 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that

8 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

9 | Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991),

10 || Dated: September 23, 2020

11

12

14 BORAH BARNES

15 | ppp UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6 DB:1/Orders/Prisoner/Civil. Rights/smit2454.f&r.dism

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.