(PC) Carroll v. Vallejo Police Department

Opinion

TREMAINE DEON CARROLL, ) Case No.: 1:23-cv-0004 JLT GSA (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL AND v. ) DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE VALLEJO POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., ) ) (Doc. 17) Defendants. ) ) )

Tremaine Deon Carroll asserts her civil rights were violated and seeks to hold the defendants liable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 5.) The assigned magistrate judge screened the allegations of the First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), and found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. 14 at 4-10.) Therefore, the magistrate judge directed Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court that she wished to stand on the First Amended Complaint, which case Plaintiff was informed the magistrate judge would recommend the matter be dismissed. (Id. at 13-14.) Plaintiff failed to respond to the Court’s order. On May 19, 2023, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s prior order and recommended the action be dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 17.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff on the same date and it notified plaintiff that any objections were due “on or before June 9, 2023.” (Id. at 3, emphasis omitted.) In addition, the Court advised Plaintiff that “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Ud., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014), Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) To date, Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise respond to the Findings and Recommendations. According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings an Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on May 19, 2023 (Doc. 17) are ADOPTE in full. 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice, for Plaintiff's failure to comply with th Court’s order. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. 14]! Dated: _ June 26, 2023 ( LAW ph L. wan TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE