Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01235/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01235-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT ANTHONY CALLENDER,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCHELLENBERG, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:18-cv-01235-DAD-GSA (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

THE CASE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

CLAIM AND FAILURE TO OBEY A COURT 

ORDER 

(Doc. No. 11)

Plaintiff Vincent Anthony Callender is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On August 28, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 

No. 1) and concluded that it did not state a cognizable claim under § 1983 against any named 

defendant. (Doc. No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint within thirty 

days and informed that failure to comply with that order would result in the action’s dismissal for 

failure to state a claim. (Id. at 18.) Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within the time 

provided.

/////

Case 1:18-cv-01235-DAD-GSA Document 14 Filed 01/31/20 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Consequently, on October 29, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations recommending that this case be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a 

claim, failure to comply with a court order, and failure to prosecute. (Doc. No. 11.) Plaintiff was 

granted fourteen days to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) 

On November 18, 2019, plaintiff filed a request that the court to clarify which of his cases 

is currently pending. (Doc. No. 12.) On November 25, 2019, the court issued an order informing 

plaintiff that this case was pending, advised him of the issuance of the October 29, 2019 findings 

and recommendations, and granted him an extension of time to file objections thereto. (Doc. No. 

13.) The time for filing objections pursuant to the November 25, 2019 order has now expired, 

and plaintiff has not filed objections or any other response to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on October 29, 2019 (Doc. No. 11) are 

adopted in full;

2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to state a claim 

upon which relief may be granted and failure to comply with a court order; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 30, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-01235-DAD-GSA Document 14 Filed 01/31/20 Page 2 of 2