(PC) Schmaus v. Covello

Opinion

JASON ERIK SCHMAUS, No. 2:20-cv-1356 DJC AC P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS P. COVELLO, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 10, 2023, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 53. On November 6, 2023, plaintiff was granted a sixty-day extension of time to respond to the motion. ECF No. 55. After failing to file a response, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition within twenty-one days and advised that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). ECF No. 56. Plaintiff then sought a fifteen-day extension of time to file his opposition. ECF No. 57. The motion was granted. ECF No. 58. Plaintiff was cautioned that no further extensions of time would be granted absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances and reminded that failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Id. The time for responding has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a response to the motion for summary judgment. ] For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: April 1, 2024 ~ Chee ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE