Tucker

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MIKEL LEE PLETT, No. 2:24-cv-02870-DAD-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 J. TUCKER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 By order filed May 23, 2025 (ECF No. 10), plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and the 19 court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. The time granted for 20 this purpose has expired and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded 21 to the court’s order. 22 In recommending this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, the court 23 considers the following factors: (1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) 24 the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public 25 policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic 26 sanctions. See Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988). Plaintiff has not stated a claim 27 and has failed…