(PC) Valenzuela v. Thorntona

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARIO A. VALENZUELA, No. 2:23-cv-02494-DAD-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 THORNTONA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state inmate, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 17 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 18 636(b)(1). 19 On February 21, 2025, the court screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint pursuant to 20 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. ECF No. 16. The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim 21 and granted plaintiff thirty days in which to file a second amended complaint to cure the 22 deficiencies. Id. The screening order warned plaintiff that failure to comply could result in a 23 recommendation that this action be dismissed. 24 The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed a second amended 25 complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. Thus, it appears that plaintiff is unable or 26 unwilling to cure the defects in the complaint. 27 //// 28 ] Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice 2 | for the reasons stated in the February 21, 2025 screening order. 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 served and filed 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. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 11 | v. Yést, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated 13 || Dated: May 19, 2025 Lal ltti¢l 7 □ □□□ EDMUND F. BRENNAN 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28