From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jourdan v. Stanislaus

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 16, 2024
24-cv-03399-AGT (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2024)

Opinion

24-cv-03399-AGT

08-16-2024

CHRISTOPHER SCOTT JOURDAN, Plaintiff, v. SELVI STANISLAUS, et al., Defendants.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Alex G. Tse United States Magistrate Judge

Christopher Scott Jourdan hasn't filed an amended complaint, and the deadline set in the prior screening order by which to do so has now passed. See dkt. 7. The “Affidavit of Mailing” at dkt. 8 is not construed by the undersigned as an amended complaint, presents no discernible claims, fails to address the deficiencies identified in the prior screening order, and does not appear to be a redacted version of the original complaint.

For the reasons identified in the prior screening order, the undersigned (i) requests that the Clerk of the Court reassign Jourdan's case to a district judge and (ii) recommends that the district judge dismiss Jourdan's complaint without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Jourdan may object to this recommendation, but he must do so within fourteen days of being served with a copy of it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jourdan v. Stanislaus

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 16, 2024
24-cv-03399-AGT (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2024)
Case details for

Jourdan v. Stanislaus

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER SCOTT JOURDAN, Plaintiff, v. SELVI STANISLAUS, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Aug 16, 2024

Citations

24-cv-03399-AGT (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2024)