(PC) Jones v. County of Sacramento

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT CHARLES JONES, No. 2:20-cv-0751 WBS DB P

Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that officers used excessive force against him. By order dated December 7, 2020, the court screened the amended complaint and determined it did not contain any cognizable claims. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was given thirty days leave to file an amended complaint and warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Those thirty days passed without plaintiff filing an amended complaint, and the court recommended that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. (ECF No. 11.)

Plaintiff filed objections requesting additional time to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 12.) The court vacated the findings and recommendations and granted plaintiff an additional sixty days to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 13.) Those sixty days have passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, sought additional time to file a complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Accordingly, the court will recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders.

For the reasons set forth above, 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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections withthe 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).

Dated: August 16, 2021

ORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DRIDR Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/R/jone075 1.f&r.dism