(PC) Lopez v. Solano County Justice Center et al, No. 2:2023cv01023 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/7/2023 ADOPTING in FULL 9 Findings and Recommendations. This action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, due to plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action and failure to comply with court orders, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED (Reader, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEPHANIE LOPEZ, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:23-cv-01023-DAD-CKD (PC) v. SOLANO COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION DUE TO PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS Defendant. 16 (Doc. No. 9) 17 Plaintiff Stephanie Lopez is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 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. On October 13, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 21 22 recommending that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to 23 prosecute this action and failure to comply with court orders. (Doc. No. 9.) In particular, on 24 August 22, 2023, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint, determined that plaintiff had failed to 25 state a cognizable claim for relief, and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 1 thirty days. (Doc. No. 6.) Plaintiff did not comply with, or otherwise respond to, the court’s 2 August 22, 2023 order.1 3 The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice 4 that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service.2 (Doc. No. 9 5 at 2.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time 6 in which to do so has long since passed. 7 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 8 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 9 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 10 Accordingly: 11 1. 12 The findings and recommendations issued on October 13, 2023 (Doc. No. 9) are adopted in full; 13 2. 14 This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action and failure to comply with court orders; and 15 3. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. December 7, 2023 DALE A. DROZD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 25 26 27 28 The service copy of the order dated August 22, 2023 was returned to the court and marked as “Undeliverable.” Thus, plaintiff was required to file a notice of her change of address with the court no later than November 30, 2023. To date, plaintiff has not filed a notice of her change of address or otherwise communicated with the court. 2 To date, the service copy of the pending findings and recommendations dated October 13, 2023 has not been returned to the court marked as undeliverable. 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.
