(PC) Love v. Peery

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANGELO M. LOVE No. 2:20-cv-01489-TLN-CKD P

Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUZANNE M. PEERY, et al.,

Defendants.

By order filed December 18, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Plaintiff has consented to this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 302. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

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, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The 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).

Dated: January 27, 2021 fi / ued, | Carp Kk. Aas

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12/lovel489.fta.docx