Opinion
22-cv-06782-LB
08-10-2023
SEAN-LYONS JOHNSON BENE, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO, et al., Defendants.
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE; REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT Re: ECF No. 1
LAUREL BEELER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The plaintiff, who represents himself and is proceeding in forma pauperis, sued Wells Fargo and four of its employees at a branch in San Leandro after they closed his checking account without notice and, on another occasion, required him to provide identifying information that was already in their system, allegedly in violation of federal statutes addressing consumer privacy and protection. The court issued a screening order to identify the complaint's deficiencies: the privacy claim - predicated on information in the bank's system - is based on two statutes that do not apply, and the closure-without-notice claim is predicated on the Consumer Credit Protection Act, which does not prohibit what happened here. The court gave the plaintiff an opportunity amend by August 1, 2023.
Compl. - ECF No. 1 at 3-6. Citations refer to material in the Electronic Case File (ECF); pinpoint citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of documents.
Order - ECF No. 18. The court incorporates the earlier order by this reference.
The plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. Because all parties must appear and consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction, the case must be reassigned. Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 2017). The court directs the Clerk of Court to reassign the case to a district judge and recommends that the newly assigned district judge dismiss the case with prejudice.
Any party must serve and file specific written objections to this recommendation within fourteen days after being served with a copy. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); Civil L.R. 72-3. Failure to file a written objection within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the district court's order.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND RECOMMENDED.