(PC) Harra v. CDCR ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHNNY HARRA, No. 2:19-cv-2233 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner, proceeding pro se. By order filed March 17, 2021, 19 plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within thirty days, why he should not be sanctioned for his 20 failure to appear at the March 15, 2021 settlement conference, and was cautioned that failure to 21 respond to such order may be construed as his lack of prosecution of this action, warranting a 22 recommendation that this action be dismissed. (ECF No. 41.) The thirty- day period has now 23 expired, and plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stay of this action is lifted; and 25 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 26 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 1 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 2 | with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 3 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 4 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 5 | (9th Cir. 1991). 6 | Dated: April 29, 2021 Foci) Aharon 8 KENDALL J. NE nam2933.fse UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28