(PS) Whitsitt v. Meeks ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM J. WHITSITT, No. 2:21-cv-00016-TLN-CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MEEKS, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff proceeds pro se in this action which is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 18 Local Rule 302(c)(3). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s complaint filed on January 4, 2021 19 attempts to bring claims under 42 U.S.C. sections 1983 and 1985 against the Cities of Stockton 20 and Manteca, the Stockton Police Department, San Joaquin County, San Joaquin County Court, 21 San Joaquin County Probation Department, Christian Life Church, and several individually 22 named defendants. (ECF No. 1.) Although the complaint does not clearly set forth the causes of 23 action or identify which defendants are named for which claim, plaintiff appears to attempt to 24 state causes of action for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and a conspiracy to violate his 25 constitutional rights. (ECF No. 1 at 4, 9, 19.) 26 In an order filed on April 5, 2021, the court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 27 § 1915(e) and ordered its dismissal for failure to state a claim and failure to meet the pleading 28 standards of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 4.) The order of dismissal 1 || additionally noted that all of plaintiffs claims appear to be barred by the doctrine of Heck v. 2 | Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994), in that plaintiff was arrested and pleaded guilty to 3 || criminal charges in connection with the events described in the complaint. 4 The order of dismissal explained the deficiencies in the pleading and granted plaintiff 5 | thirty days to file an amended complaint. The order of dismissal warned plaintiff that failure to 6 | file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 7 The time granted for plaintiff to file an amended complaint has passed. Although plaintiff 8 || has communicated with the court in a letter filed on May 10, 2021, plaintiff has not filed an 9 | amended complaint, sought an extension of time to do so, or indicated that he intends to do so. 10 Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED: 11 1. This action be dismissed for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute. See Fed. 12 R. Civ. P. 41(b); and 13 2. The Clerk’s office be directed to close this case. 14 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 15 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within 21 days after 16 | being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 17 | the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to 18 | Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 19 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 20 | Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 21 || Dated: May 13, 2021 d ) / de dias CAN fe fl. Ago 22 CAROLYNK.DELANEY |” 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 || 8.whitsitt.0016.fta 26 27 28