(PS) Mendez v. Sacramento Police Officers ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VICTORIA REYES MENDEZ, Case No. 2:21-cv-1965-DJC-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SACRAMENTO POLICE OFFICERS, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On December 19, 2022, I screened plaintiff’s complaint, notified her that it failed state a 19 claim, and granted her thirty days to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff failed to 20 timely file an amended complaint. Accordingly, on April 10, 2023, I ordered her to show cause 21 within fourteen days why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure 22 to state a claim. ECF No. 6. I notified her that if she wished to continue with this lawsuit, she 23 would need to file an amended complaint. I also warned plaintiff that failure to comply with the 24 April 10 order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. 25 The deadline has passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise 26 responded to the April 10, 2023 order. Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 27 28 1 1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, 2 | and failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the December 19, 2022 order. 3 2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days 6 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 7 | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 9 | objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 10 | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 11 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 12 | v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 ( 1 Ow — Dated: _ June 13, 2023 q-—— 16 JEREMY D. PETERSON 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28