(PC) Mosley v. Cargill ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELAN J. MOSLEY No. 2:19-cv-00393-KJM-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 STEVE CARGILL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a California inmate represented by counsel in this civil rights action filed 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed June 11, 2020, plaintiff’s first amended complaint 19 was dismissed and thirty days leave to file a second amended complaint was granted. The thirty 20 day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise 21 responded to the court’s order. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 23 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 28 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified MADE SLD UVM GY SINGIN NS NES MUO, a Pa ete PAY ee 1 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 2 | (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: July 21, 2020 f° Lf i, / CAN fu fl. ay 4 CAROLYN K. DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/mos10393.fta.docx 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28