(PS) Grissom v. Modesto Police Department ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TONY VALENTINO GRISSOM, Case No. 1:21-cv-01273-JLT-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION 13 v. FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE/OBEY A COURT 14 MODESTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, et ORDER al., 15 (Doc. 11) Defendants. 16 17 The assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations that the action be 18 dismissed for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute/obey a court order. (Doc. 11.) The 19 court advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the 20 waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id. at 20, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 21 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) The magistrate judge provided 22 plaintiff 21 days to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) He did not do so 23 filed, and the time to object has expired. 24 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist., 708 25 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully 26 reviewed the matter, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the 27 record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 28 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated March 23, 2022 (Doc. 11), are 1 ADOPTED in full. 2 2. This action is DISMISSED, without prejudice. 3 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 4 5 | ITIS ORDERED. 6] Dated: _ April 20, 2022 Cerin | Tower 7 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