Hines v. Yousseff, et al

Filing 32

ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING Defendants Lynn Carmichael and Barbara Newkirk 29 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 2/19/14. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DARNELL T. HINES,
Plaintiff,

11
v.

12
13

ASHRAFE E. YOUSEFF, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-00357 - AWI - JLT
ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING
DEFENDANTS LYNN CARMICHAEL AND
BARBARA NEWKIRK

Darnell Hines (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action against Defendants Ashrafe Youseff, Joshua

16
17

Garza, Godwin Ugueze, Lynn Carmichael, and Barbara Newkirk on March 12, 2013. (Doc.1.)

18

Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute his claims against Lynn Carmichael and Barbara Newkirk, the

19

Magistrate Judge recommended these defendants be dismissed. (Doc. 29.)
The parties were granted fourteen days from the date of service, or until February 14, 2014, to

20
21

file objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 29 at 3.) In addition, Plaintiff was

22

“advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the

23

District Court’s order.” (Id. at 4, citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)). However, no

24

objections were filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi

25

Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court has conducted a de novo

26

review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings and

27

Recommendation are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

28

///
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations filed January31, 2014 (Doc. 29) are ADOPTED
IN FULL;

3
4

2.

Lynn Carmichael and Barbara Newkirk are DISMISSED as defendants; and

5

3.

Plaintiff’s claims against Lynn Carmichael and Barbara Newkirk are DISMISSED

6

WITH PREJUDICE for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the

7

Court’s orders.

8
9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 19, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
2