(PC) Smith v. Santoro ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY J. SMITH, Case No. 1:21-cv-01329-JLT-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE 13 v. CLAIM FOR RELIEF, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE 14 K. SANTORO, et al., ACTION 15 Defendants. (Doc. 30) 16 17 The assigned magistrate judge screened the First Amended Complaint and found Plaintiff 18 failed to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. 30.) In addition, the Court determined that further leave 19 to amend would be futile given Plaintiff’s failure to cure the deficiencies previously identified to 20 him. (Id.) 21 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff. It contained notice 22 that any objections were to be filed within 14 days after service. (Id. at 9.) The Court advised 23 Plaintiff that “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of the 24 ‘right to challenge the magistrate’s factual findings’ on appeal.” (Id. quoting Wilkerson v. 25 Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014).) To date, Plaintiff has not filed objections, and the 26 time to do has expired. 27 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the magistrate judge’s 1 | Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the 2 | Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on August 30, 2022 (Doc. 30) are 4 adopted in full. 5 2. The instant action is dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. 6 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this action. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ September 27, 2022 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28