(PC)Moten v. Pfeiffer

District Court, E.D. California·Decided August 29, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-00043·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHARROD MOTEN, No. 1:24-cv-00043 JLT GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. (Doc. 27) 14 CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to statute, Plaintiff was required to and has paid the filing fee in 19 full. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On July 31, 2025, considering that Plaintiff had been afforded several prior opportunities 22 to amend his complaint, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to dismiss the 23 matter without prejudice for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. (Doc. 27.) 24 The Court served the findings and recommendations on the plaintiff and notified him that any 25 objections were due within 14 days. (Id. at 6.) The Court advised him that the “failure to file 26 objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id. at 7, citing 27 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and 28 the time to do so has passed. 1 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 2 | case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the findings and 3 || recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 4 1. The findings and recommendations issued July 31, 2025 (Doc. 27), are 5 ADOPTED IN FULL. 6 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim, 7 specifically, for Plaintiff's failure to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 8(a)(2) and (d)(1). 9 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 | Dated: _August 29, 2025 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)Moten v. Pfeiffer, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

(PC)Moten v. Pfeiffer ((PC)Moten v. Pfeiffer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

J. Wilkerson v. B. Wheeler
772 F.3d 834 (Ninth Circuit, 2014)