(PC)Witkin v. Snelling ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL AARON WITKIN, No. 2:21-cv-2181 JAM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 C. SNELLING, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order issued February 17, 2022, plaintiff’s complaint was screened, and he was given 18 thirty days within which to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 11. At that time, plaintiff was 19 warned that failure to timely file an amended complaint would result in the dismissal of this 20 action. Id. at 10. More than thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has neither filed an amended 21 complaint, nor has he responded to the court’s order in any way. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without 23 prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 110; 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, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 28 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 1] || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 2 | (9th Cir. 1991). 3 || DATED: March 28, 2022 ~ 4 ttt0n— ALLISON CLAIRE 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28