Opinion
2:13-cv-2494 JAM DB P
06-01-2021
H. DYMITRI HARASZEWSKI, Plaintiff, v. KNIPP, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff alleges interference with his mail, deprivation of his person al property, placement in administrative segregation without due process, and retaliation. On June 29, 2020, over 11 month ago, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Despite numerous extensions of time, as described in this court's April 16, 2021 order, plaintiff has failed to file an opposition to that motion.
In the April 16 order, this court gave plaintiff one, final extension of time to file his opposition to the summary judgment motion. Plaintiff was warned that this court would grant no further extensions of time for that purpose. Plaintiff was further warned that if he failed to file an opposition to the summary judgment within 30 days, this court would recommend this action be dismissed. Those 30 days have passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition to the summary judgment motion.
For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiffs failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. See E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41.
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, either party may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court's order. Martinez v. Ylst 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).