(PC) Casity v. Riebe et al, No. 2:2022cv02181 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/30/23 ADOPTING 18 Findings and Recommendations in full and DISMISSING this action without prejudice, due to plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action and failure to obey a court order. CASE CLOSED (Licea Chavez, V)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD D. CASITY, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:22-cv-02181-DAD-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. TODD RIEBE, et al., Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION DUE TO PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT ORDER (Doc. No. 18) 17 18 Plaintiff Richard D. Casity 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 8, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 22 recommending this action be dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a 23 court order and failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 18.) In particular, on May 4, 2023, the 24 court screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint, determined that plaintiff had failed to state a 25 cognizable claim for relief, and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint. (Doc. No. 14.) 26 Plaintiff did not respond. Accordingly, on July 5, 2023, the court ordered him to show cause 27 within twenty-one (21) days why this action should not be dismissed and warned him that failure 28 to comply with that order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Doc. 1 1 No. 15 at 1–2.) To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise communicated 2 with the court. Accordingly, the pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff 3 and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after 4 service. (Doc. No. 18 at 2.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have 5 been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 6 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 7 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 8 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 9 Accordingly: 10 1. 11 The findings and recommendations issued on August 8, 2023 (Doc. No. 18) are adopted in full; 12 2. 13 This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action and failure to obey a court order; and 14 3. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 18 Dated: The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. November 30, 2023 DALE A. DROZD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.