(SS) Burns v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:2019cv01534 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 9 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER DISMISSING action due to Plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim, failure to comply with a Court Order, and failure to prosecute, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 04/18/2020. 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 GINNY RENE BURNS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 1:19-cv-01534-DAD-SAB (SS) v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSING THIS ACTION (Doc. No. 9) Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Ginny Rene Burns, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed his complaint 18 19 in this action on October 29, 2019. (Doc. No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On November 15, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order in which it was 21 22 concluded that plaintiff had failed to state a cognizable claim for a violation of her federal rights 23 and granting plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. (Doc. No. 8.) The order contained 24 notice that any amended complaint plaintiff might elect to file was due within thirty (30) days 25 from the date of service and warned plaintiff that her failure to file an amended complaint would 26 result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 6–7.) Plaintiff has yet to file an 27 amended complaint and the time to do so under the November 15, 2019 order has long since 28 passed. 1 1 On December 20, 2019, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 2 recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim, 3 failure to prosecute, and failure to obey a court order. (Doc. No. 9.) The findings and 4 recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were 5 to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 9.) No objections have been filed, and 6 the time in which to do so has passed. 7 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 8 court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 9 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 10 Accordingly: 11 1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 20, 2019, (Doc. No. 9), are 12 13 adopted in full; 2. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim, failure to 14 15 16 17 comply with 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: April 18, 2020 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 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.