(PC) Hall v. Macomber ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEMAGEO HALL, No. 2:20-cv-1701 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 JEFF MACOMBER, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. 16 17 On August 5, 2022, this court directed plaintiff to file a pretrial statement on or before 18 October 3, 2022. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order. The court will therefore 19 recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 20 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants are relieved 21 from filing a pretrial statement; and 22 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 23 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 27 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 1 | objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 2 || parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 3 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 | Dated: October 18, 2022 Card ke yy a 5 CAROLYN K DELANEY? 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9} 1 10 hall1701.fpt 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28