(PC) Mitchell v. Cory ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TIMOTHY MITCHELL, No. 2:20-cv-2132-JAM-EFB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 JAMES CORY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 6, 2021, defendant Cory, the sole defendant in this case, filed a 19 motion to dismiss. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). On September 3, 2021, and again on October 20 18, 2021, the court warned plaintiff that failure to respond to the motion could result in a 21 recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF Nos. 25 & 29. The time for responding to 22 the motion has passed, and despite being granted two extensions of time, plaintiff failed to file an 23 opposition or otherwise respond to the motion. Plaintiff has disobeyed this court’s orders and 24 failed to prosecute this action. The appropriate action is dismissal without prejudice. 25 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 26 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110. 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, any party may file written 2 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 3 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 4 | within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 5 || Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 | DATED: December 6, 2021. tid, PDEA 8 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28