1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL A. CRAIG, No. 2:22-cv-01874 DAD AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 GENA JONES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed October 22, 2024, the complaint was screened and found to not state a 18 claim for relief. ECF No. 29. Plaintiff was given thirty days to file an amended complaint that is 19 no longer than 25 pages in length and cautioned that failure to do so would result in a 20 recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. at 6. After plaintiff failed to file an amended 21 complaint, he was given an additional twenty-one days to amend the complaint and warned that 22 failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without further 23 warning. ECF No. 34. Twenty-one days have now passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended 24 complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the complaint be dismissed for 26 failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the October 22, 2024, Screening Order (ECF 27 No. 29). See L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 28 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 1 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 2 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 3 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 4 || to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 5 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 6 || Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991). 7 | DATED: February 19, 2025 8 Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28