(PC) Grzeslo v. Fisher

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 JAMES GRZESLO, 1:21-cv-01371 JLT EPG (PC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL, DISMISSING 13 vs. THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 14 B. SUAZO, CLOSE THE CASE

15 Defendant. (Doc. 66)

16 17 The assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this 18 case be dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with Court orders and to prosecute 19 this case. (Doc. 66.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff had failed to file a scheduling and discovery 20 statement, despite being given multiple opportunities to do so. (Doc. 66.) In addition, the magistrate 21 judge noted that Plaintiff has repeatedly submitted filings accusing the magistrate judge of violating his 22 constitutional rights, condoning hate crimes against him, and being incompetent, thus indicating that he 23 would not follow any orders going forward in the case. (Id. at 1-4.) Furthermore, the magistrate judge 24 recommended that Plaintiff’s two recent filings, including an affidavit and a request for judicial notice 25 which repeats his arguments of bias and unlawful rulings, be denied. (See Docs. 64, 65.) 26 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on all parties and notified them that any 27 objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 66 at 5.) The Court also informed them that the “failure to 28 file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing 1 || Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014), Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 2 || (9th Cir. 1991).) To date, no objections have been filed. Moreover, Plaintiff has not filed the 3 || scheduling and discovery statement as previously ordered. 4 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this Court conducted a de novo 5 || review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the Findings and 6 || Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 7 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on July 26, 2023, (Doc. 66), are 8 ADOPTED in full. 9 2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with court 10 orders and to prosecute this case. 11 3. Plaintiff's recent filings (Docs. 64, 65, 67) are denied as MOOT. 12 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 || Dated: _ August 20, 2023 Charis [Tourn 16 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28