Dustin Thomas Gordon v. Jim Cooper, et al.

Opinion

Plaintiff, No. 2:24-cv-2741 TLN CSK P v. JIM COOPER, et al., ORDER Defendants. Plaintiff Dustin Thomas Gordon (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On May 1, 2025, the magistrate judge dismissed Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and ordered Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 18 at 8.) Thirty days passed and Plaintiff did not submit anything to the Court. Accordingly, on June 12, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations recommending the Court dismiss the action without prejudice. (ECF No. 19.) The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen days. (Id. at 2.) This deadline has passed, and no objections have been filed. The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. See also Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260–61 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted) (dismissing case for failure to comply with court order). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 19), are ADOPTED in full; and 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Date: September 9, 2025