Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01882/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01882-2/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 

SIMON THORNTON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DEB K., et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:22-cv-1882 AC P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 By order filed April 10, 2024, plaintiff’s complaint was screened and plaintiff was granted 

leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. The thirty day period has long since expired, 

and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order 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. 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a district judge 

to this case. 

 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 

Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

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

Case 2:22-cv-01882-DJC-AC Document 10 Filed 12/19/24 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 

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

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

the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 

Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 

waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 

1991). 

DATED: December 18, 2024 

Case 2:22-cv-01882-DJC-AC Document 10 Filed 12/19/24 Page 2 of 2