(PC) Smith v. Parole Board

Opinion

ANTHONY X. SMITH, No. 2:19-cv-2454 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PAROLE BOARD, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims his rights have been violated because he has not received a parole hearing. By order dated May 22, 2020, the first amended complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff given sixty days to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiff was warned that failure to file an amended complaint may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 7.) The time to file an amended complaint has 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. Because plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint and failed to comply with the court’s order, the court will recommend that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to randomly assign this action to a district judge. wOASe 2 ADM ETT PRIN ED MVOC Sor POC eT er AYO eT

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. 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 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. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991), Dated: September 23, 2020

BORAH BARNES ppp UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DB:1/Orders/Prisoner/Civil. Rights/smit2454.f&r.dism