(PC) Floyd v. Jones ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRYAN KEITH FLOYD No. 2:18-cv-02470-JAM-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SCOTT JONES, 15 Defendant. 16 17 By order filed April 29, 2019, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days leave to 18 file an amended complaint was granted. Plaintiff was granted one last 60-day extension of time 19 to file an amended complaint on August 9, 2019. ECF No. 10. In that same order, plaintiff was 20 advised that no further extensions of time would be granted. ECF No. 10. The time to file an 21 amended complaint has now expired, and plaintiff has not done so or otherwise responded to the 22 court’s August 9, 2019 order. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 24 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 28 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 1 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 2 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 3 | (9th Cir. 1991). 4 | Dated: October 23, 2019 f° Lf i, / ; CAN fu fl. ay CAROLYN K. DELANEY 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 12/floy2470.fta.docx 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28