From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cortijo v. Andre

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 4, 2023
2:23-cv-0454 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-0454 DB P

12-04-2023

DEANGELO CORTIJO, Plaintiff, v. ST. ANDRE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that defendants denied him the ability to make phone calls, retaliated against him, and discriminated against him in violation of his constitutional rights.

By order dated October 10, 2023, the undersigned screened and dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted thirty days leave to file an amended complaint and advised that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) Those thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, requested additional time to file an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court's order. Accordingly, the undersigned will recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders.

For the reasons set forth above, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign this action to a United States District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See E.D. Cal. 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 twenty-one (21) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. 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).


Summaries of

Cortijo v. Andre

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 4, 2023
2:23-cv-0454 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2023)
Case details for

Cortijo v. Andre

Case Details

Full title:DEANGELO CORTIJO, Plaintiff, v. ST. ANDRE, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 4, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-0454 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2023)