Opinion
No. 2:15-cv-1560 AC P
09-16-2015
CHRISTOPHER C. GARLAND, Plaintiff, v. R. J. RACKLEY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff commenced this prisoner civil rights action by filing a complaint on July 21, 2015. This action is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302(c). By order filed August 6, 2015, plaintiff was directed to submit an in forma pauperis application or pay the appropriate filing fee within thirty days. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to comply with the court's order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See ECF No. 4.
The thirty-day period has expired and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order. Moreover, review of the Inmate Locator Website operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) indicates that plaintiff may no longer be incarcerated under the authority of CDCR.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a District Judge to this action.
In addition, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty one days after service of these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court; such 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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: September 16, 2015
/s/_________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
See http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/ (Inmate Locator website operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation). This Court may take judicial notice of facts that are capable of accurate determination by sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also City of Sausalito v. O'Neill, 386 F.3d 1186, 1224 n.2 (9th Cir. 2004) ("We may take judicial notice of a record of a state agency not subject to reasonable dispute.").