1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MANDEEP SINGH, No. 2:24-cv-1872 DJC AC PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 UR M. JADDOU, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was 18 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 19 On November 4, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and 20 recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice 21 to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed 22 within twenty-one days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and 23 recommendations. 24 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to 25 be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s analysis. Having 26 considered the factors described in Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 27 1992) the Court finds that dismissal is appropriate. 28 //// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 4, 2024, are adopted in 3 | full; and 4 2. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for 5 | failure to comply with the court's order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 6 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 | Dated: _January 9, 2025 “Dane A Hon. Daniel alabretta 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28