(PC) Morehead v. Welch et al, No. 1:2018cv01568 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 9 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this instant action be dismissed, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to state any cognizable claim upon which relief may be granted and failure to obey Court Order and Failure to prosecute and Failure to obey a Court Order, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/14/2019. CASE CLOSED(Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JESSIE MOREHEAD, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 WELCH, et al., 15 No. 1:18-cv-01568-DAD-BAM (PC) Defendants. 16 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER (Doc. No. 9) 17 18 19 Plaintiff Jessie Morehead is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 20 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 21 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On May 14, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 23 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and determined that it failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Doc. No. 24 8.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a first amended complaint attempting to cure the 25 deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge within thirty days. (Id. at 7.) Plaintiff was warned 26 that his failure to file an amended complaint in compliance with the screening order would result 27 in dismissal of this action. (Id.) More than thirty days have passed, but to date, plaintiff has not 28 filed a first amended complaint. 1 1 Therefore, on July 9, 2019, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 2 recommending dismissal of this action, with prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to state a 3 cognizable claim upon which relief may be granted, failure to obey a court order, and failure to 4 prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 9.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff 5 and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after 6 service. (Id. at 8.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed, 7 and the time in which to do so has now passed. 8 9 10 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court adopts the findings and recommendations. 11 Accordingly, 12 1. 13 14 adopted; 2. 15 16 17 18 19 The findings and recommendations issued on July 9, 2019 (Doc No. 9) are This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 14, 2019 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.