1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFFREY DANIEL HUDSON, Case No. 3:22-cv-0196-CAB-DEB Booking No. 21149533, 12

Plaintiff, 13 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL vs. ACTION FOR FAILING 14 TO PROSECUTE IN COMPLIANCE SAN DIEGO SHERIFF’S DEP’T, 15 WITH COURT ORDER Defendant. 16 17 18 19 I. Introduction 20 On February 10, 2022, Jeffrey Daniel Hudson (“Plaintiff” or “Hudson”), who is 21 proceeding pro se, was housed at the George Bailey Detention Facility (“GBDF”) and filed 22 a civil rights complaint pursuant to

in this Court. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff did 23 not prepay the civil filing fee required by

(a); instead, he filed a Motion 24 to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to

(a). ECF No. 2. 25 On May 3, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis 26 and dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to

(e)(2) and 28 U.S.C. 27 § 1915A(b)(1). ECF No. 7. Plaintiff was granted forty-five (45) days from the date of the 28 dismissal Order to file a First Amended Complaint. Id. at 7. 1 Discussion 2 Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint was due on or before June 18, 2022. To date, 3 ||he has failed to amend, and has not requested an extension of time in which to do so.' “The 4 || failure of the plaintiff eventually to respond to the court’s ultimatum—either by amending 5 complaint or by indicating to the court that [he] will not do so—is properly met with the 6 || sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal.” Edwards v. Marin Park,

, 1065 (9th Cir. 7 || 2004). 8 Conclusion and Order 9 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this civil action in its entirety based on 10 || Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief can be granted pursuant to 28 11 |/U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)Gi) and § 1915A(b)(1), and his failure to prosecute as required by 12 || Court’s May 3, 2022 Order. 13 The Court further CERTIFIES that an IFP appeal would not be taken in good faith 14 || pursuant to

(a)(3) and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter a final judgment of 15 || dismissal and close the file. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: July 8, 2022 € 18 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 19 United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 |} 27 The Court’s May 3, 2022 Order was returned “undeliverable” and it appears that Plaintiff was released 28 | rrovide his current addres as required by the Courts eal les,