(PC) Carter v. Murphy

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NATHANAEL JAMES CARTER, JR., No. 2:22-CV-0291-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 D. MURPHY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 21, 2022, the Court directed Plaintiff to file an amended 19 complaint within 30 days. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal of 20 this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local 21 Rule 110. More than 30 days have elapsed and Plaintiff has not complied. 22 The Court must weigh five factors before imposing the harsh sanction of dismissal. 23 See Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); Malone v. U.S. Postal 24 Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). Those factors are: (1) the public's interest in 25 expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its…