Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01810/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01810-7/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 

MERVIN S. DUNFORD, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JEFFEREY A. BEARD, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:15-cv-1810 AC P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

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

U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed September 2, 2016, plaintiff was given a final thirty days to file an 

amended complaint and warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a 

recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 

15. Thirty days have now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise 

responded to the order. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a 

United States District Judge to this action. 

 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

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 twenty-one days 

Case 2:15-cv-01810-JAM-AC Document 16 Filed 10/24/16 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

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

with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations.” 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: October 24, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-01810-JAM-AC Document 16 Filed 10/24/16 Page 2 of 2