(PC) Alexander-Campos v. Bruce

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 ROBERT J. ALEXANDER CAMPOS, III, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-0958 JLT CDB ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ) COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A ) CLAIM, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF 14 BRUCE, et al., ) COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE ) 15 Defendants. ) (Doc. 26) ) 16

17 Robert Alexander-Campos, III, sought to hold the defendants—including the California 18 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and several correctional officers—liable for violations of 19 his civil rights while housed at Pleasant Valley State Prison. (See generally Doc. 22.) The magistrate 20 judge screened Plaintiff’s third amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) and found he 21 failed to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. 26 at 2-5.) Because Plaintiff failed to cure the pleading 22 deficiencies identified after the Court provided the applicable legal standards and granted leave to 23 amend, the magistrate judge found further “leave to amend would be futile.” (Id. at 5.) Therefore, the 24 magistrate judge recommended the Court dismiss the action for failure to state a claim. (Id.) 25 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff at the address on record and 26 notified him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 25 at 6.) The Court advised him that 27 the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” 28 (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) However, the U.S. Postal 1 || Service returned the Court’s mail as undeliverable, also indicating Plaintiff was no longer in custody, 2 on July 16, 2025. Nevertheless, the Court’s service is deemed fully effective pursuant to Local Rule 3 || 182(f). 4 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. Havi 5 || carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported 6 || by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 7 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated (Doc. 26) are ADOPTED in full. 8 2. Plaintiffs third amended complaint is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. 9 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 10 11 ||/IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 || Dated: _ August 4, 2025 ( LAW pA L. wan 13 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28