Goodwin v. State Farm General Insurance Company

Opinion

7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 DUCHUN GOODWIN, Case No. 1:24-cv-0795 JLT SAB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 14 STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE CLOSE THE CASE COMPANY, et al., 15 (Doc. 7) Defendants. 16 17 Duchun Goodwin initiated this action by filing a complaint on July 9, 2024. (Doc. 1.) The 18 assigned magistrate judge screened Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). 19 (Doc. 6.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim arising under 20 federal law, such that this Court may have jurisdiction over the complaint. (Id. at 6-9.) The Court 21 granted Plaintiff an opportunity to cure the pleading deficiencies and ordered Plaintiff to file any 22 amended complaint within 30 days. (Id. at 10-11.) 23 After Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint, the magistrate judge issued Findings and 24 Recommendations, recommending the action be dismissed. (Doc. 7.) The magistrate judge 25 reiterated the findings in the Screening Order, again finding that Plaintiff’s failed to state a claim 26 and did not invoke this Court’s jurisdiction. (Id. at 4-10.) In addition, the magistrate judge found 27 terminating sanctions were appropriate for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the action and failure to obey the Court’s order to file an amended complaint, after considering the factors identified by 1 | the Ninth Circuit. Ud. at 10-12.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the matter be 2 | dismissed “for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim, failure to prosecute, and failure to comply with a 3 | court order.” (Id. at 12.) 4 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that any 5 | objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 7 at 12.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the “failure 6 | to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (d., 7 | citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file 8 | objections, and the time to do so has passed. 9 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 10 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 11 | are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 12 1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 27, 2024 (Doc. 7) are 13 ADOPTED in full. 14 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim 15 that invokes this Court’s jurisdiction, failure to prosecute, and failure to comply with 16 the Court’s order. 17 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 18 19 IS SO ORDERED. 29 | Dated: _ October 17, 2024 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28