(PC) Armstrong v. Plumas County of California

Opinion

ERIC ANTHONY ARMSTRONG, No. 2:21-cv-01881-WBS-EFB (PC) Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant. Plaintiff is a county jail inmate without counsel who brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has dismissed the case without prejudice and entered judgment in 2022 after plaintiff failed to amend his complaint to state a viable claim. ECF Nos. 27, 28. Plaintiff asks the court to re-open the case, ECF No. 29, but provides no justification for doing so. “A dismissal without prejudice terminates the action and concludes the rights of the parties in that particular action.” United States v. California, 507 U.S. 756, 756 (1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). If plaintiff wishes to pursue the claim(s) he raised in this action, he must open a new case by filing a new complaint. Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the court deny plaintiff’s February 21, 2025 motion to reopen (ECF No. 29). 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)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party 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.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). ° or / <2 Pix Dated: August 12, 2025 Zot l bt TelACYl EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]