(PC) Diaz, II v. CDCR ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HENRY EDWARD DIAZ, II, No. 1:23-cv-1378 JLT SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ACTION, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 14 CDCR, et al., (Doc. 15) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Henry Edward Diaz, II, initiated this action seeking to hold the CDCR and individual 18 officers liable for violations of his civil rights at C-SATF State Prison. (See generally Doc. 1.) 19 The magistrate judge screened Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) and found 20 Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. 12 at 3-9.) The Court granted Plaintiff leave to 21 amend his complaint and informed him that if he failed to do so, the magistrate judge would 22 recommend dismissal. (Id. at 10-11.) After Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint, the 23 magistrate judge issued an order Plaintiff to show cause why the action should not be dismissed 24 for failure to prosecute. (Doc. 13.) Plaintiff did not respond to the Court’s order. 25 The magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations, reiterating the prior findings 26 that Plaintiff failed to state a claim. (Doc. 15 at 4-10.) In addition, the magistrate judge found 27 Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s orders and failed to prosecute the case. (Id. at 10.) 28 Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the “action be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to 1 | comply with a court orders, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a cognizable claim for relief.” 2 | Ud. at 12-13.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him 3 | that any objections were due within 14 days. (Ud. at 13.) The Court advised him the “failure to 4 | file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (d., citing 5 | Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and 6 | the time to do so has passed. 7 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 8 | case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 9 | Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 10 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on January 26, 2023 (Doc. 15) are 11 ADOPTED in full. 12 2. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. 13 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: _ February 22, 2024 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28