1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT ANTHONY TAYLOR, No. 2:25-cv-2985 DJC CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MIRANDA DROLETTE, 15 Respondent. 16 17 By order filed October 17, 2025, petitioner was informed that he failed to sign his habeas 18 application and thirty days’ leave to file a signed application, and to file an application to proceed 19 in forma pauperis, was granted. (ECF No. 4.) On December 2, 2025, petitioner was sua sponte 20 granted a fourteen day extension of time to comply with the October 17, 2025 order. Fourteen 21 days have now passed, and petitioner has not submitted a signed habeas petition and an 22 application to proceed in forma pauperis, or responded to the court’s order. 23 In recommending this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, the Court has 24 considered “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to 25 manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring 26 disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives.” Ferdik v. 27 Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). Because this case cannot 28 move forward without petitioner’s participation, the Court finds the factors weigh in favor of 1 |} dismissal. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 3 || prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 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, petitioner may file written 7 || objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 8 | Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 9 || specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 10 | F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 1] 12 | Dated: December 19, 2025 4 aA 13 \ Aaa spe CHI SOO KIM 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 || /Aayl2985.fta.hab 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28