From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. Danforth

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 29, 2021
2:20-CV-2278-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2021)

Opinion

2:20-CV-2278-WBS-DMC-P

09-29-2021

WILLIAM C. HILL, Plaintiff, v. PAUL DANFORTH, Defendant.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 9, 2021, the Court directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 110. More than 30 days has elapsed and Plaintiff has not complied.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See id.

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 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Hill v. Danforth

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 29, 2021
2:20-CV-2278-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Hill v. Danforth

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM C. HILL, Plaintiff, v. PAUL DANFORTH, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 29, 2021

Citations

2:20-CV-2278-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2021)