(PC) Gaon v. Lau et al

Filing 14

ORDER ADOPTING 13 Findings and Recommendations and DISMISSING Action signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/8/2021. CASE CLOSED. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 No. 1:20-cv-00182-NONE-JLT (PC) AMOS GAON, Plaintiff, v. T. LAU, et al., ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION (Doc. No. 13) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Amos Gaon is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 18 civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 28, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued a screening order, finding that 21 plaintiff’s first amended complaint fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted. (Doc. No. 22 10.) The magistrate judge directed plaintiff to file a second amended complaint curing the 23 deficiencies in his pleading. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or 24 otherwise respond to the screening order. 25 Therefore, on October 15, 2020, the magistrate judge issued an order requiring plaintiff to 26 show cause in writing, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed due to his failure 27 to comply with a court order. (Doc. No. 11.) The order to show cause cautioned plaintiff that 28 “[f]ailure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed for 1 failure to state a claim and to obey a court order.” (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff has failed to respond to the 2 order to show cause. 3 Accordingly, on November 19, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge filed findings and 4 recommendations, recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to obey 5 court orders and failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. (Doc. No. 13.) The 6 findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and provided him 14 days to file 7 objections thereto. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the pending findings and 8 recommendations and the time do so has passed. 9 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 10 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 11 and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 12 Accordingly, 13 1. are adopted in full; 14 15 2. 3. 20 21 The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this action for purposes of closure and to close this case. 18 19 This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to obey court orders and failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted; and, 16 17 The findings and recommendations issued on November 19, 2020 (Doc. No. 13) IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 8, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?