Williams v. County of Fresno ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ASHLEY WILLIAMS, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-01543 JLT EPG 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DIMISSING 12 v. CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE 13 COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al., (Doc. 83) 14 Defendants. 15 16 Ashley Williams— individually and as guardian ad litem for A.R., D.R., H.M., and 17 G.M.—and Hector Mendez are proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. On January 24, 2022, 18 the assigned magistrate judge determined Plaintiffs failed to prosecute the action following the 19 withdrawal of counsel, and did not comply with the Court’s order. (Doc. 83.) Therefore, the 20 magistrate judge recommended this case be dismissed, without prejudice, due to Plaintiffs’ failure 21 to prosecute and comply with the Court’s order dated December 13, 2021. (Id. at 4.) The 22 Findings and Recommendations permitted the parties fourteens days to file any objections. (Id.) 23 To date, no objections have been filed by either party and the time to do so has expired. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley 25 United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of 26 this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court finds the Findings and 27 Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thurs, the Court ORDERS: 28 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated January 24, 2022 (Doc. 83) are 1 ADOPTED. 2 2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3 3, The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case, as this order terminates the matter 4 in its entirety. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7) Dated: _ March 3, 2022 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28