(PC) Corral v. Martinez ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DYLAN SCOTT CORRAL, No. 2: 19-cv-0859 JAM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CORPORAL MARTINEZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed April 22, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and forty-five days 18 leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Forty-five days from that date have now passed, 19 and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 21 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 22 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 23 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 24 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 25 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 26 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 27 //// 28 //// 2 LDMOS EAINTTING IN RAUL 2 PO Ee OY ev 1 | failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 2 | Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: June 16, 2020 ‘ Frese Arn 5 KENDALL J. NE Corr859.fta UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28