Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00593/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00593-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RANDY AUSBORN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CHCF, et. al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:20-cv-593-EFB P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This 

proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

 On April 23, 2020, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A. ECF No. 8. The court dismissed the complaint, explained the deficiencies therein, and 

granted plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. Id. 

The screening order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that 

this action be dismissed. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an 

amended complaint. Thus, it appears that plaintiff is unable or unwilling to cure the defects in the 

complaint. 

 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to randomly assign a United States 

District Judge to this action. 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:20-cv-00593-KJM-JDP Document 11 Filed 06/15/20 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2 

Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice for the 

reasons set forth in the April 23, 2020 screening order (ECF No. 8). 

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

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

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

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

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: June 12, 2020. 

Case 2:20-cv-00593-KJM-JDP Document 11 Filed 06/15/20 Page 2 of 2