(PC) Estrada v. Pfeiffer

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JAIME IGNACIO ESTRADA, No. 1:23-cv-00769 KES GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ORDER 13 v. PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS DUE JUNE 4, C. PFEIFFER, et al., 2024 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20 On April 9, 2024, Plaintiff’s complaint was screened and the Court found that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. ECF No. 12 at pg 14. As a result, Plaintiff was ordered to file a first amended complaint and was given thirty days to do so. Id. At that time, Plaintiff was also cautioned that his failure to fully comply with the order within the time allotted might result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed. Id. 25 More than thirty days has now passed and Plaintiff has neither filed an amended complaint nor otherwise responded to the Court’s order. Therefore, the undersigned will recommend that this matter be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order. See Fed. R. Civ P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

4 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 – by June 4, 2024, – Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. 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.

10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14 Dated: May 21, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE