Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02579/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02579-1/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 

EDWARD BRIDGEMAN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA 

CORRECTION, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:15-cv-2579 AC P 

ORDER and 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff commenced this prisoner civil rights action by filing a complaint on December 

14, 2015. This action is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302(c).1 By order filed December 29, 2015, plaintiff 

was directed to submit a fully completed in forma pauperis application or pay the appropriate 

filing fee within thirty days. See ECF No. 5. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply with 

the court’s order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

See id. at 2. 

The thirty-day period has long expired and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order. 

Moreover, review of the Inmate Locator Website operated by the California Department of 

 

1

 Plaintiff submitted an “Order Re. Consent or Request for Reassignment” indicating both that he 

consented, and did not consent, to the authority of the undersigned Magistrate Judge for all 

purposes. See ECF No. 4; see also ECF No. 5 (directing plaintiff to choose only one of the 

options). 

Case 2:15-cv-02579-JAM-AC Document 7 Filed 03/15/16 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

Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)2 indicates that plaintiff continues to be incarcerated at the 

California Medical Facility, where plaintiff was incarcerated when he commenced this action. 

The court infers from this fact that plaintiff received the court’s prior order and chose to disregard 

it. 

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

District Judge to this action. 

Additionally, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. 

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

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

after service of these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the 

court; such 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: March 15, 2016 

 

2

 See http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/ (Inmate Locator website operated by CDCR). This Court 

may take judicial notice of facts that are capable of accurate determination by sources whose 

accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also City of Sausalito v. 

O’Neill, 386 F.3d 1186, 1224 n.2 (9th Cir. 2004) (“We may take judicial notice of a record of a 

state agency not subject to reasonable dispute.”). 

Case 2:15-cv-02579-JAM-AC Document 7 Filed 03/15/16 Page 2 of 2