(PC) Reed v. Leatherman

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PETER J. REED, No. 2:18-cv-0038 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS D. LEATHERMAN, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 On September 23, 2021, plaintiff was ordered to file a response to defendants’ August 23, 2021 motion for sanctions for violation of a protective order within 21 days. Plaintiff was warned that failure to file a response would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The 21-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a response.

22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

24 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 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 || waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. | 1991).

3 || Dated: October 28, 2021 Card Kt | ([z4 □□□ 4 CAROLYNK.DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8] 1 reed0038.frs 1]