1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EARON DREVON DAVIS, No. 2:23–cv–00657-TLN–CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. 14 ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR COMPANY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and in forma pauperis. The matter was referred 18 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c). 19 On June 30, 2023, the undersigned issued an order screening the complaint and finding 20 that it did not establish a basis for federal jurisdiction nor state a claim under the federal pleading 21 standards. Plaintiff was granted 28 days to either amend the complaint or file a notice of 22 voluntary dismissal, and was informed that failure to do either would result dismissal of the 23 action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff has not filed an 24 amended complaint or otherwise responded to the order. 25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all pleading, discovery, and motion practice in this action 26 are STAYED pending resolution of the findings and recommendations. With the exception of 27 objections to the findings and recommendations and any non-frivolous motions for emergency 28 relief, the court will not entertain or respond to any motions and other filings until the findings 1 || and recommendations are resolved. 2 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant 3 || to Rule 41(b). 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 6 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 7 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 8 | to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 9 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 10 | Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991). 11 | Dated: August 8, 2023 / aa / x ly a 2 CAROLYN K.DELANEY 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 || 2/davis657.fers R41 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28