1 2 3

4 5

6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE A. ROJAS, Case No. 1:18-cv-01095-LJO-JDP

12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CASE BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE 13 v. TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, AND FAILURE TO COMPLY 14 KVSP, et al., WITH A COURT ORDER

15 Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE IN FOURTEEN DAYS

16

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought 18 under

. On May 6, 2019, I screened plaintiff’s complaint and found that he 19 failed to state a claim. ECF No. 11. I ordered plaintiff to amend his complaint and warned that 20 failure to comply with the order would result in dismissal of this action. See

. Plaintiff has 21 not filed an amended complaint. 22 The court may dismiss a case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a 23 court order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv.,

(9th Cir. 2005). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a court has a duty to 25 resolve disputes expeditiously. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1; Pagtalunan v. Galaza,

, 642 26 (9th Cir. 2002). 27 In considering whether to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute, a court ordinarily 28 considers five factors: “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the 1 || court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy 2 || favoring disposition of cases on their merits and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.” 3 || Omstead v. Dell, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Henderson v. Duncan, 779 4 | F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986)). The fourth factor weighs against dismissal. But dismissal 5 || would promote expeditious resolution, see Pagtalunan,

, and would allow our 6 || overburdened court to manage its docket more effectively. Further delay increases the risk that 7 || memories will fade and evidence will be lost, and at this stage in the proceeding there is no 8 || satisfactory lesser sanction that would protect the court’s scarce resources. Therefore, I find that 9 | the first, second, third, and fifth factors weigh in favor of dismissal, and I recommend dismissal 10 || without prejudice on that basis. 11 As more thoroughly discussed in my screening order, plaintiff has failed to state a claim 12 | against defendants, which provides an additional basis for dismissing this case. See ECF No. 11. 13 | Recommendations 14 I recommend that the case be dismissed for plaintiff's failures to state a claim, prosecute, 15 || and comply with a court order. I submit these findings and recommendations to the U.S. district 16 || judge presiding over the case under

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304. Within 17 | fourteen days of the service of the findings and recommendations, the parties may file written 18 || objections to the findings and recommendations with the court and serve a copy on all patties. 19 | The document containing the objections must be captioned “Objections to Magistrate □□□□□□ □ 20 | Findings and Recommendations.” The presiding district judge will then review the findings and 21 | recommendations under

(b)(1)(C). 22 73 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 ( Catan Dated: _ October 30, 2019 25 UNIT#D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 No. 204 28