Opinion
2:23-cv-0237 KJN P
07-26-2023
GURPREET SINGH, Plaintiff, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., Defendants.
ORDER & FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
By order filed May 18, 2023, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Although plaintiff's first copy of the order was returned, the order was re-served on plaintiff at his new address on June 22, 2023. Thirty days from that date have passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and
IT IS HEREBY 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 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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).