Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-00636/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-00636-12/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
K. Bertholf
Defendant
Quincy Mack
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

QUINCY MACK,

Plaintiff,

v.

K. BERTHOLF,

Defendant.

No. 2:18-cv-0636 MCE CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On October 28, 2019, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. On 

December 9, 2019, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to 

the pending motion within thirty days. In the same order, plaintiff was informed that failure to 

file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 41(b). The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the 

court’s order. 

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 

dismissed 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)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

Case 2:18-cv-00636-MCE-CKD Document 50 Filed 01/21/20 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: January 21, 2020

1

mack0636.46fr

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:18-cv-00636-MCE-CKD Document 50 Filed 01/21/20 Page 2 of 2