(PS)Giddens v. Solano County

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RICHARD GIDDENS, No. 2:19-cv-19-KJM-EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SOLANO COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 On March 11, 2020, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s first amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). ECF Nos. 47 & 48.

19 The court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim, explained the deficiencies therein, and granted plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. Id. The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Thus, it appears that plaintiff is unwilling or unable to cure the defects in the complaint.

24 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim as set forth in the court’s March 11, 2020 order. ECF No. 48; see ECF No. 47.

26 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 wOASe 2 LD UVM EY UING I MUO VIR eA eT || 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 served and filed 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. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez || v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

7 | Dated: May 14, 2020. tid, PDEA 9 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE