(PC) Cato v. Diaz et al, No. 1:2020cv00510 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 11 Findings and Recommendations in Full; ORDER Dismissing Case without Prejudice for Failure to Comply with the Court's Screening Order; ORDER for Clerk to Close Case signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/01/2021. CASE CLOSED.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES CATO, JR., 12 Plaintiffs, 13 14 15 16 vs. No. 1:20-cv-00510-NONE-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL (Doc. No. 11) DIAZ, et al., Defendants. ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S SCREENING ORDER 17 (Doc. No. 10) 18 ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE 19 20 21 22 23 Plaintiff James Cato, Jr. is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 24 pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to 25 a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). 26 On September 20, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 27 recommendations, recommending that this case be dismissed, without prejudice, for Plaintiff’s 28 failure to comply with the court’s screening order issued on July 28, 2021. (Doc. No. 11.) The 1 1 pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any 2 objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days from the date of service. (Id.) To 3 date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed with the court, and the 4 time in which to do so has now passed. 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this court has conducted 6 a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the 7 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 8 Accordingly, 9 1. 10 11 20, 2021 (Doc. No. 11), are adopted in full; 2. 12 13 The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on September This case is dismissed without prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s screening order issued on July 28, 2021; and 3. The clerk is directed to close this case. 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 1, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 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.