(PC) Ridgeway v. Doerer

Opinion

MICHAEL RIDGEWAY, Case No. 1:24-cv-1180 JLT GSA (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, v. DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK J. DOERER, et al., OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE Defendants. (Doc. 6) Michael Ridgeway seeks to hold the Government and several employees of the Bureau of Prisons—including, but not limited to, the Warden of USP Atwater, associate wardens, medical staff, mail room staff—liable for violations of his civil rights while incarcerated at USP Atwater.1 The assigned magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to obey the Court’s orders to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis and file an amended complaint, and thus failed to prosecute the action. (Doc. 6 at 1-2; see also Doc. 2 at 9, Doc. 4 at 2.) The magistrate judge found terminating sanctions are appropriate, after considering the factors identified by the Ninth Circuit in Malone v. United States Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). (Id. at 2-4.) The magistrate judge recommended that the Court dismiss the action without prejudice. (Id. at 4.) 1 On October 3, 2024, the Court severed Plaintiff’s claims from Benanti v. Doerer, Case No. 1:24-cv-01108- CDB and directed Plaintiff to: (1) file a signed complaint bearing his own case number; and (2) submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $405.00 filing fee to proceed with this action. (See Doc. 2 at 6-9.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 6 at 5.) The Court advised him that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights on appeal.” (/d. at 5, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed. However, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 18, 2025. (Doc. 7.) According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Although Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, Plaintiff failed to cure the entirety of his noncompliance with the Court’s orders. Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee or apply to proceed in forma pauperis. Without payment of the filing fee, the matter cannot proceed. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914, 1915(a)(1)-(2); see also Saddozai v. Davis, 35 F.4th 705, 709 (9th Cir. 2022). The Court repeatedly warned Plaintiff that the matter would be dismissed if he failed to pay the filing fee or complete an application to proceed in forma pauperis as ordered, and the factors set forth by the Ninth Circuit weigh in favor of terminating sanctions. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued February 25, 2025 (Doc. 6), are ADOPTED in full. 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey the Court’s orders. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. Dated: _ May 6, 2025 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE