(PC) Jones v. County of Sacramento

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT CHARLES JONES, No. 2:20-cv-0708 TLN DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a county detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 26, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was screened and found to be devoid of a cognizable claim. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff was then granted leave to file an amended complaint, a notice of his willingness to stand on the complaint as written, or a notice of voluntary dismissal. The deadline for responding to the screening order has now passed, and plaintiff has not responded or sought an extension of time to do so. Plaintiff was specifically informed that his failure to respond would result in the recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court order and failure to state a claim.

25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim and for failure to obey a court order. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

1 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)(1). Within fourteen days | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff 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.” 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. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

8 | Dated: October 27, 2020 ll ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE | sz; DB/Inbox/Routine/jone0708.fr dism