Williams v. CDCR Department Corrections and Rehabilitations et al

Filing 30

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT'S ORDER, TO PROSECUTE, AND TO STATE A CLAIM 28 , 29 ; STRIKE PER 425 U.S.C. § 1915(g) signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/1/2016. CASE CLOSED. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

VINCE WILLIAMS,

10

Plaintiff,

11
12
13

v.
CDCR DEPARTMENT CORRECTIONS
AND REHABILITATIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

14

No. 1:14-cv-01912-LJO-JLT (PC)
ORDERADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING
ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FOR
PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO COMPLY
WITH THE COURT'S ORDER, TO
PROSECUTE, AND TO STATE A CLAIM
(Docs. 28, 29)
STRIKE PER 425 U.S.C. § 1915(g)

15
16

Plaintiff, Vince Williams, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

17

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 22, 2014. The matter was referred to

18

a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On

19

January 12, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a findings and recommendation that this action be

20

dismissed with prejudice because of Plaintiff’s failure both to obey a court order and to prosecute

21

this action and that Plaintiff be given a strike under 42 U.S.C. § 1915(g) since he failed to state a

22

cognizable claim. (Doc. 29.) The findings and recommendations issued that same date and gave

23

plaintiff thirty days to file objections. (Id.) Plaintiff did not file any objections.

24

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

25

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the

26

Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

27

///

28

//
1

1

Accordingly:

2

1. the Findings and Recommendations, issued on January 12, 2016 (Doc. 29), is adopted

3
4

in full;
2. this action is dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim, failure to

5

obey a court order, and failure to prosecute this action;

6

3. dismissal of this action counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and

7

4. the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this action.

8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 1, 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2