(PC) Arzaga v. Santiago ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL JESUS ARZAGA, No. 2:18-cv-0313 KJM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 E. SANTIAGO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. He paid the filing fee. On 18 January 19, 2022, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within thirty days, why defendant Santiago 19 should not be dismissed, and cautioned that failure to respond would result in a recommendation 20 that defendant Santiago be dismissed from this action without prejudice. (ECF No. 110.) The 21 thirty-day period expired, and plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s 22 order.1 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Santiago be dismissed 24 from this action without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 25 //// 26 27 1 Plaintiff sought and was granted extensions of time to oppose the pending motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by defendants Pak and Gisler. (ECF Nos. 111, 112, 113.) But plaintiff’s 28 motion did not address defendant Santiago or the court’s order to show cause. ] These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 2 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 3 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 4 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 5 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 6 || may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 7 || Cir. 1991). 8 | Dated: April 14, 2022 Foci) Aharon 10 KENDALL J. NE Jarza0313.foc UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28