(PC) Her v. Warden Mendota Prison ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NOU HER, No. 1:23-cv-00488 JLT BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ACTION WITH PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 14 WARDEN MENDOTA PRISON, et al., CLOSE THE CASE 15 Defendants. (Doc. 8) 16 17 Nou Her is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The assigned magistrate judge screened the allegations of 19 Plaintiff’s complaint and found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim under Bivens v. Six 20 Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). (Doc. 6.) The magistrate judge also determined it 21 appeared leave to amend was futile, but nevertheless granted Plaintiff leave to amend to the 22 extent he could do so in good faith. (Id. at 7.) The Court also informed Plaintiff that, in the 23 alternative, he could file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id.) 24 On August 3, 2023, after Plaintiff failed to file either an amended complaint or voluntary 25 dismissal—or otherwise respond to the Court’s screening order—the magistrate judge found 26 Plaintiff failed to state a claim, failed to obey an order, and failed to prosecute the action. (Doc. 8.) 27 The magistrate judge recommended the action be dismissed with prejudice. The Court served the 28 Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff at the only address on record with the Court, but that 1 | document was returned as “Undeliverable, Unable to Forward” on August 18, 2023. Plaintiff has 2 | not filed a change of address, and the Court remains unable to communicate with Plaintiff. 3 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of the 4 | case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the Findings and 5 || Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Based upon the foregoing, 6 | the Court ORDERS: 7 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on August 3, 2023 (Doc. 8), are 8 ADOPTED in full. 9 2. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice, due to Plaintiff's failure to state a 10 claim, failure to obey a court order, and failure to prosecute. 11 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 12 B IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 | Dated: _ October 25, 2023 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ' Local Rule 183(b) requires a plaintiff proceeding pro se to keep the Court apprised of his current address, and provides that if a plaintiff fails to notify the Court of a current address within 27 | 63 days of mail being returned the Court may dismiss the action. Because more 63 days have passed since the Findings and Recommendations were returned as undeliverable, Plaintiff failed 28 | to comply with Local Rule 183(b). Dismissal is also appropriate on these grounds.