(PC) Hammock v. CDCR, No. 2:2021cv00529 - Document 23 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/01/22 ADOPTING 21 Findings and Recommendations in full and DISMISSING the action due to plaintiff's failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM HAMMOCK, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:21-cv-00529-DAD-JDP (PC) v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION CDCR, Defendant. (Doc. No. 21) 16 17 18 Plaintiff William Hammock is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This 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 May 20, 2022, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 22 recommending that the action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court 23 orders, and failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 21.) The findings and recommendations were 24 served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within 25 fourteen (14) days of service. (Id. at 2.) It appears from the docket that the mailed copy of the 26 findings and recommendations to plaintiff was returned to the court as undeliverable. However, 27 petitioner was properly served. It is the petitioner’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of 28 his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record 1 1 address of the party is fully effective. Furthermore, more than sixty days have since passed since 2 the findings and recommendations were served at plaintiff’s address of record, and plaintiff has 3 not filed a notice of change of address. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 5 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 6 including plaintiff’s objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported 7 by the record and proper analysis. 8 Accordingly, 9 1. 10 11 The findings and recommendations issued on May 20, 2022 (Doc. No. 21) are adopted in full; 2. 12 This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim; and 13 3. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. September 1, 2022 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.