(PC) Price v. Sutton et al, No. 1:2019cv00717 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 15 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Action, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 04/26/2021.CASE CLOSED. (Maldonado, C)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KARIM HASAN PRICE, 12 13 14 15 No. 1:19-cv-00717-DAD-GSA (PC) Plaintiff, v. JOHN SUTTON, et al., Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION (Doc. No. 15) 16 17 18 Plaintiff Karim Hasan Price is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 19 this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United 20 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 . 21 On August 21, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant 22 to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and determined that it failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Doc. 23 No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a first amended complaint attempting to cure the 24 deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge within thirty (30) days after service of that 25 screening order. (Id. at 12–13.) Plaintiff was warned that his failure to file a first amended 26 complaint in compliance with the screening order would result in a recommendation that this 27 action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Id. at 13.) Plaintiff requested two extensions of 28 time in which to file an amended complaint, and the court granted those requests. (Doc. Nos. 11, 1 1 12, 13, 14.) That extended deadline has now passed. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended 2 complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal. 3 Accordingly, on March 12, 2021, the magistrate judge issued findings and 4 recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a 5 court order, failure to prosecute this action, and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 6 granted. (Doc. No. 15.) The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and 7 contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after 8 service. (Id. at 2.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed, 9 and the time in which to do so has now passed. 10 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 11 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 12 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 13 Accordingly, 14 1. 15 16 adopted; 2. 17 18 19 20 The findings and recommendations issued on March 12, 2021 (Doc No. 15) are This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute this action; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 26, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2