Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02784/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02784-3/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID M. DAVID

Plaintiff, No. 2: 11-cv-2784 DAD P

vs.

N. GRANNIS, et al., ORDER AND 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order entered April 3, 2012, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty

days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. On May 24, 2012, plaintiff was granted an

additional sixty days in which to file his amended complaint. Sixty days from that date have now

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

order. Plaintiff has neither consented to nor declined magistrate judge jurisdiction in this matter. 

Therefore, the Clerk of the Court will be directed to randomly assign a district judge to this

action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to

randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action.

Furthermore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).

1

Case 2:11-cv-02784-KJM-DB Document 13 Filed 09/11/12 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

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, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served

within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

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

DATED: September 10, 2012.

DAD:dpw

DAD1/prisoner-civil rights/davi2784.fta.ext

2

Case 2:11-cv-02784-KJM-DB Document 13 Filed 09/11/12 Page 2 of 2