(PC) Gibbs v. Shasta County ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT A. GIBBS, No. 2:18-cv-2261 JAM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SHASTA COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Robert Gibbs proceeds pro se with a civil rights complaint challenging conditions 18 of his prior incarceration in the Shasta County Jail. On June 11, 2020, following his release from 19 confinement, plaintiff submitted a non-prisoner application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF 20 No. 9. By order filed July 14, 2020, this court directed plaintiff to submit, within 21 days after 21 service of the court’s order, a supplemental affidavit clarifying the value of his “land in Shasta 22 County.” ECF No. 10. Plaintiff was informed that “[f]ailure . . . to timely submit this 23 supplemental affidavit will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without 24 prejudice.” Id. at 3. 25 The deadline has expired without plaintiff responding to the court’s order or otherwise 26 communicating with the court. 27 //// 28 wOAOe 6. LOU VEAINTT ENN RAMU, PI VO ee PY ee 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 2 || prejudice for lack of prosecution. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) 5 || days after service of these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections 6 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 7 || and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right 8 || to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 9 | DATED: August 12, 2020 ~ 10 Hhthren— Char ALLISON CLAIRE 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28