Opinion
1:20-cv-01342-NE-EPG (PC)
09-17-2021
WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Plaintiff, v. SGT. PEREA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. NO. 12)
Plaintiff William J. Gradford is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. The matter was initially referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 and later reassigned to Magistrate Judge Helena Barch-Kuchta. (Doc. No. 7.)
Plaintiff filed this case on September 21, 2020, against defendants Sgt. Perea, Sgt. R. Johnson, and Lt. Houston, regarding their alleged connection to the purported misconduct of Deputies T. Webster and F. Velasco while plaintiff was incarcerated at the Stanislaus Public Safety Center. (Doc. No. 1.) On July 22, 2021, this court granted plaintiff's request to relate cases under Local Rule 123, finding this case related to 1:20-cv-00543-NONE-EPG, and reassigning this case to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. (Doc. No. 10.)
On July 23, 2021, Magistrate Judge Grosjean entered an order, noting the similarities between this case and 1:20-cv-00543-NONE-EPG and directing plaintiff to inform the court whether he wished to proceed in this action given his recent desire to dismiss similar allegations in 1:20-cv-00543-NONE-EPG, the lack of recent filings in the instant case, and the need to conserve judicial resources. (Doc. No. 11.) After plaintiff failed to respond to this order, Magistrate Judge Grosjean entered findings and recommendations on August 11, 2021, recommending that this case be dismissed without prejudice because of Plaintiff s failure to prosecute and comply with a court order. (Doc. No. 12.) On August 23, 2021, plaintiff filed a document titled, “objection to magistrate judge[']s findings and recommendations, ” but listed no coherent objections in that document. (Doc. No. 13.)
On August 24, 2021, Magistrate Judge Grosjean entered an order noting a discrepancy between plaintiffs identification of his mailing address in this case and his identification of his mailing address in a separate case, 1:21 -cv-01019-DAD-BAM. (Doc. No. 15.) Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Grosjean ordered plaintiff to notify the court within fourteen days of a single current address for the court to send him mail. (Id. at 2). To date, plaintiff has failed to respond to this order and the time to do so has expired.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiffs objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Grosjean on August 11, 2021 (Doc. No. 12), are adopted in full;
2. This case is dismissed without prejudice because of plaintiff s failure to prosecute and comply with a court order; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this action for purposes of closure and to close this case
IT IS SO ORDERED.