(PC) Casto v. Newsom

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HERSHEL WAYNE CASTO, II, Case No. 2:19-cv-02209-KJM-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 NEWSOM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On November 7, 2022, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 53. 18 The court granted plaintiff two extensions of time to file a response to that motion, with July 3, 19 2023, as the final deadline. See ECF Nos. 56 & 62. After plaintiff did not file a response by that 20 deadline, on July 13, 2023, I ordered plaintiff to show cause by August 3, 2023, why this case 21 should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court’s local rules. 22 ECF No. 63. I advised plaintiff that should he wish to proceed with this lawsuit he must file by 23 August 3, 2023, either an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion for 24 summary judgment. Id. at 2. I warned him that failure to comply with that order would result in 25 dismissal of this action. Id. 26 To date, plaintiff has not responded to defendants’ motion or the court’s July 13, 2023 27 order to show cause. 28 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 1 1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court 2 | orders. 3 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 53, be denied as moot. 4 3. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 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)(1). Within fourteen days of 7 | service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the 8 | court and serve a copy on all parties. Such document should be captioned “Objections to 9 | Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response shall be served and filed 10 | within fourteen days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 11 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 12 | Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 13 1991). 14 1s IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 | 1 Sty — Dated: _ August 7, 2023 q——— 17 JEREMY D. PETERSON 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28