(PC) Howland v. Catalli ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NICKOLAS J. HOWLAND, No. 2:19-cv-0608 JAM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CATALLI, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 10, 2019, defendants filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 17.) 19 After plaintiff failed to file a response, he was given an additional twenty-one days to respond to 20 the motion and warned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be 21 dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 19.) Twenty-one days have now 22 passed without any response from plaintiff. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 24 prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 28 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 1 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 2 | objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 3 | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 4 | appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 | Dated: March 10, 2020 Ci dp. f | fe 6 CAROLYN K. DELANEY : 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 || 13:howl0608.mtd.nooppo.f&r 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28