(PC)Willard v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Opinion

JESSE WILLARD, Case No. 1:19-cv-1073-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE; AND

v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, et al., FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE Defendants. The Court recently Plaintiff to file a completed in forma pauperis affidavit and a certified copy of his prison trust account statement within forty-five days and cautioned him that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The forty-five-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s order and has not filed the required documents. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this case, and the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 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.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 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). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE