(PC) Elias v. Kinross

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEIRON M. ELIAS, No. 2:17-cv-02106 WBS DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 J. KINROSS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 By order filed July 12, 2023, this court directed plaintiff to file a pretrial statement on or 19 before September 20, 2023. By order of the same date, plaintiff was warned that failure to file a 20 pretrial statement could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this action. 21 Plaintiff has not filed a pretrial statement and has not otherwise responded to the court’s order. It 22 is therefore recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 16(f); Local Rule 110. 24 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 25 1. Defendant is relieved from filing a pretrial statement. 26 2. The pretrial conference to be conducted on the file is vacated; and 27 //// 28 //// ] IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 2 | Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f); Local Rule 110. 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 fourteen days 5 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 6 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 7 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 8 | objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 9 || parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 10 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 || Dated: September 27, 2023

elia2106.fpt 13 14 BORAH BARNES 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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