(PC) Bucaojit v. Solano County Sheriff's Department

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ANDREW MICHAEL BUCAOJIT, No. 2:19-cv-2055-WBS-JDP P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SOLANO COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 21, 2020,the court screened plaintiff’s amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. ECF No. 21. The court found service appropriate as to defendant Solano County and granted plaintiff thirty days either to return documents necessary to effect service of process on that defendant or to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies in the other claims. Id. The order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. The time for acting has passed,and plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

25 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110.

27 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 2h VEU RSE MUO OO PO I eT OY ee | 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.” 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).

6 | DATED: October 6, 2020 ’ —\ ppnsnn Caton _ 8 STATE GISTRATE JUDGE