1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AVTAR SINGH, No. 2:25-cv-01867 DAD AC PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 Plaintiff, appearing in pro se, filed a complaint and paid the filing fee on July 2, 2025. 19 ECF No. 1. That same day, a scheduling order was issued directing the plaintiff to 20 serve a copy of the scheduling order and complete service of process within 90 days of filing the 21 complaint. ECF No. 3 at 2. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to complete service within 90 22 days may result in dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 40(m). Id. The deadline passed, and 23 no certificate of service was filed. On October 6, 2025, the court issued an Order to Show Cause 24 why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, noting that the filing of proof of 25 service within 14 days would discharge the order. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff did not respond or file a 26 proof of service. Accordingly, the undersigned concludes that plaintiff has abandoned this case. 27 In recommending this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, the court has 28 considered “(1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to 1 || manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring 2 | disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives.” Ferdik v. 3 || Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). Because this case cannot 4 | move forward without plaintiffs participation, the court finds the factors weigh in favor of 5 | dismissal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 6 || prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to pay the filing fee. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 7 || Local Rule 110. 8 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 9 || assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within twenty-one (21) 10 || days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 11 || objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 12 | Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 13 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 14 | Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991). 15 | DATED: October 23, 2025 * 16 Chthwen— Clare ALLISON CLAIRE 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28