(PC) Ramos v. Rocha ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL AJURIA RAMOS, No. 2:19-cv-0726 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 I. ROCHA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed November 1, 2021, this court directed plaintiff to file a pretrial statement on 18 or before December 28, 2021. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order. The court will 19 therefore recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); 20 Local Rule 110. 21 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 22 1. Defendants are relieved from filing a pretrial statement. 23 2. The pretrial conference set for April 28, 2022, is vacated; and 24 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 25 Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); Local Rule 110. 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 1 | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 2 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 3 || objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 4 || parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 5 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 || Dated: January 5, 2022 Foci) Aharon 8 KENDALL J. NE kamo0726 ft UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28