1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 DAVID NATHANIEL ROBERTS, No. 2:20-cv-01349 WBS DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 WARDEN LYNCH, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. By order dated January 21, 2022, the court found the complaint had stated a 18 cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim against defendants Peluso and Jones but failed to 19 state any other cognizable claim. (ECF No. 19.) The court ordered plaintiff to file notice 20 informing the court whether he wished to proceed on his cognizable claims or be given leave to 21 file an amended complaint. (Id. at 8.) Plaintiff was given thirty days leave to file such a notice. 22 (Id.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to abide by the court’s order would result in a 23 recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id.) 24 More than thirty days have passed and plaintiff has not filed notice of how he wishes to 25 proceed with the court, filed an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or otherwise 26 responded to the court’s orders. Accordingly, it will be recommended that this action be 27 dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and failure to prosecute. 28 //// 1 For the reasons state above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 2 | dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 5 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 6 | with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections 7 | to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 8 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 9 | Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991), 10 | Dated: May 18, 2022 11 12

B ‘BORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14 15 16 17

DB:14

18 | pB/pp Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/R/robe1349.fr.dism 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28