(PC) Allen v. Haris

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TELLY ALLEN, Case No. 2:20-cv-02396-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS, AND

HARIS, FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

Defendant. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS

On February 3, 2021, I screened plaintiff’s complaint, notified him that the complaint failed to state a claim, and granted him sixty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff failed to timely file an amended complaint. Accordingly, on April 26, 2021, I ordered him to show cause within twenty-one days why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 10. I notified him that if he wished to continue with this lawsuit, he must file an amended complaint. I also warned him that failure to comply with the April 26 order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The deadline has passed, and plaintiff has neither filed an amended complaint nor otherwise responded to the April 26, 2021 order. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case.

Further, it is RECOMMENDED that:

1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the February 3, 2021 order, see ECF No. 7; and

2. the Clerk of Court be directed to close the case.

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, 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.” 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. Vist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED. ( 1 Sy — Dated: _ July 21, 2021

JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE