(PC) Walker v. Howard
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARQUISE WALKER, Case No.: 1:22-cv-00332-JLT-CDB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS THIS 13 v. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 14 HOWARD, et al., (Doc. 26) 15 Defendant.
16 17 Plaintiff seeks to hold defendant liable for violations of his civil rights pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 The magistrate judge recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice for 21 Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, or, alternatively, that defendant’s motion to dismiss be granted in 22 part and denied in part, and that Plaintiff be granted leave to file a first amended complaint within 23 thirty days. (Doc. 26.) The magistrate judge advised the parties that the “failure to file objections 24 within the specified time may result in waiver of his rights on appeal.” (Id. at 11-12, citing 25 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 26 (9th Cir. 1991)). No party has filed objections and the time to do so has passed. 27 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 1 | Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. The Court is most 2 | persuaded, in takin the action below, by the fact that Plaintiff failed to respond to a specific order 3 | of the Court and failed to file any objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court 4 | concludes that Plaintiff is no longer interested in pursuing this action. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on October 1, 2024 (Doc. 26) are 6 ADOPTED. 7 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiffs failure to prosecute. 8 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate all pending motions and to close this 9 case. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 | Dated: _ October 28, 2024 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
(PC) Walker v. Howard ((PC) Walker v. Howard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.