(PC) Jacques v. Weiss

Filing 18

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 11/22/24 randomly REASSIGNING case to District Judge Troy L. Nunley and Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan, the new case number: 2:23-cv-0346 TLN SCR; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim, for failure to prosecute, and for failure to follow the court's order. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to these F&Rs due within 21 days. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL E. JACQUES,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

R. WEISS, et al.,

15

No. 2:23-cv-0346-SCR P

ORDER AND FINDINGS &
RECOMMENDATIONS
Defendants.

16
17
By order filed July 15, 2024, plaintiff was granted an extension of time of 60 days to file a

18
19

second amended complaint pursuant to the court’s order of May 21, 2024. That time period

20

expired, and plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint or otherwise respond to the court’s

21

order. On October 31, 2024, the court gave plaintiff one more opportunity to file a second

22

amended complaint or otherwise respond to the court’s order and warned plaintiff that failure to

23

do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. That time too has expired

24

and plaintiff has not filed a second amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s most

25

recent order.
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court

26
27

shall assign a district judge to this case; and

28

////
1

1

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to

2

state a cognizable claim, for reasons provided in the court’s order of May 21, 2024, which are

3

incorporated herein; for failure to prosecute; and for failure to follow the court’s order. See Local

4

Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

5

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

6

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 21 days after

7

being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with

8

the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to

9

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

10

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.

11

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

12
13

Dated: November 22, 2024

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2