(PS) Zhai v. Markstein Beverage Company ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANN ZHAI, No. 2:19-cv-1980 JAM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MARKSTEIN BEVERAGE COMPANY, et al., 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Ann Zhai proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the 19 undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By order 20 signed March 30, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and plaintiff was granted leave to 21 file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was 22 granted sixty days from the date of that order to file the amended complaint and was specifically 23 cautioned that the failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner would result in a 24 recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 7.) The sixty-day period has expired, and 25 plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order in any manner. 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 2 | prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed.R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 These findings and recommendations will be 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 thirty days after 5 | being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 6 | the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 7 | Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 8 || specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 9 | order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 | Dated: October 12, 2020 11 12 B ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 DLB:6 24 | DB\orders\orders.pro se\zhail 980.fta.f&rs 25 26 27 28