(PC) Ibuado v. Federal Prison Atwater ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GERALD IBUADO, Case No. 1:22-cv-00651-AWI-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS 13 v. ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO OBEY 14 FEDERAL PRISON ATWATER, et al., COURT ORDER, AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 19) 16 17 Plaintiff Gerald Ibuado (“Plaintiff”) is a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of 19 Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On November 8, 2022, the assigned Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s first amended 22 complaint and issued findings and recommendations that this action be dismissed for failure to 23 state a cognizable claim upon which relief may be granted. (ECF No. 14.) After Plaintiff filed a 24 motion providing new factual allegations, the Magistrate Judge found it appropriate to vacate the 25 pending findings and recommendations and granted Plaintiff leave to file a second amended 26 complaint incorporating the new allegations. (ECF Nos. 17, 18.) Plaintiff was expressly warned 27 that failure to file a second amended complaint would result in dismissal of this action, with 28 prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 18, p. 3.) 1 On March 1, 2023, following Plaintiffs failure to file a second amended complaint or 2 | otherwise communicate with the Court, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and 3 || recommendations recommending dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a 4 | claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, failure to obey a court order, and failure to prosecute. 5 | (ECF No. 19.) Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained 6 | notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (/d. at 7 | 10.) More than fourteen days have passed, and no objections have been filed. 8 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 9 | de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 10 | the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper 11 analysis. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 13 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on March 1, 2023, (ECF No. 19), are 14 adopted in full; 15 2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, due to Plaintiff's failure to state a claim, 16 failure to obey a court order, and failure to prosecute; and 17 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 59 | Dated: _April 7, 2023 — 7 : 7 Cb bod — SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28