(PC) Price v. Sutton et al

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING 15 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Action, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 04/26/2021.CASE CLOSED. (Maldonado, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KARIM HASAN PRICE,

12
13
14
15

No. 1:19-cv-00717-DAD-GSA (PC)

Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN SUTTON, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
ACTION
(Doc. No. 15)

16
17
18

Plaintiff Karim Hasan Price 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 21, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant

22

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and determined that it failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Doc.

23

No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a first amended complaint attempting to cure the

24

deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge within thirty (30) days after service of that

25

screening order. (Id. at 12–13.) Plaintiff was warned that his failure to file a first amended

26

complaint in compliance with the screening order would result in a recommendation that this

27

action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Id. at 13.) Plaintiff requested two extensions of

28

time in which to file an amended complaint, and the court granted those requests. (Doc. Nos. 11,
1

1

12, 13, 14.) That extended deadline has now passed. To date, plaintiff has not filed an amended

2

complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal.

3

Accordingly, on March 12, 2021, the magistrate judge issued findings and

4

recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a

5

court order, failure to prosecute this action, and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

6

granted. (Doc. No. 15.) The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and

7

contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after

8

service. (Id. at 2.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed,

9

and the time in which to do so has now passed.

10

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

11

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the

12

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

13

Accordingly,

14

1.

15
16

adopted;
2.

17
18
19
20

The findings and recommendations issued on March 12, 2021 (Doc No. 15) are

This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a
court order and failure to prosecute this action; and

3.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 26, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2