Opinion
2:20-cv-2484 DB P
06-08-2021
RANDALL E. HEGGIE, Plaintiff, v. SHASTA COUNTY JAIL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff is a county inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. In an order filed January 27, 2021, this court found plaintiff's complaint failed to state any claims for relief under §1983. (ECF No. 12.) This court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff was given 60 days to file a first amended complaint.
In an order filed April 20, 2021, this court noted that plaintiff had not filed a first amended complaint. (ECF No. 16.) Plaintiff had, however, filed a document in which he appeared to seek a court order for an investigation. (ECF No. 15.) This court denied that request and gave plaintiff an additional 30 days to file a first amended complaint. This court warned plaintiff that if he failed to file a timely first amended complaint, this court would recommend plaintiff's action be dismissed. Included with the service of the April 20 order was a second copy of the court's January 27 order.
Thirty days have passed and plaintiff has not filed a first amended complaint or otherwise responded to the April 20 order.
Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to randomly assign a district judge to this case; and
IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiffs failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. See E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41.
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty 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.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court's order. Martinez v. Ylst 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).