(PC) Hamilton v. CDCR

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ALBERT JOHN HAMILTON, No. 2: 23-cv-00347 DJC KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 15 Defendant.

17 By order filed March 14, 2023, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended complaint was granted. (ECF No. 12.) On April 21, 2023, the undersigned granted plaintiff an additional thirty days to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 18.) Thirty days from April 21, 2023, have passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

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 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff 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.” 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).

3 | Dated: June 1, 2023 ' Foci) Aharon 5 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Ham347.fta 1]