(PC) Wilbanks v. Tappen

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JONATHAN WILBANKS, No. 2:21-cv-0026 KJM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS T. TAPPEN, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On January 18, 2022, plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file a motion to amend accompanied by a proposed third amended complaint including his putative claims against Dr. Yee. Thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has not filed such documents or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Therefore, plaintiff’s putative claims against Dr. Yee should be dismissed, and this action should proceed on plaintiff’s claim that defendant Tappen violated plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights by allegedly using excessive force.

24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s putative claims against Dr. Yee be dismissed without prejudice.

26 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, 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 filed and served 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. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

6 | Dated: March 10, 2022 Foci) Aharon 8 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ° /wvilb0026.57 1]