Howard v. Adams et al

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING 20 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 4/14/2009. CASE CLOSED (Figueroa, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 DERRAL ADAMS, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 14 15 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. The matter 16 was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 17 Rule 72-302. 18 On March 11, 2009, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending 19 dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file 20 objections within thirty days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and 21 recommendations. 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 23 73-305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the 24 entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 25 proper analysis. 26 1 vs. ORDER RE: FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS (#20) STEVEN HOWARD, Plaintiff, 1: 08 CV 0659 OWW WMW PC IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on March 11, 2009, are adopted in full; and 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 14, 2009 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?