Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00722/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00722-5/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

RYAN P. DAVIDSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

T. CHAVEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:18-cv-00722-DAD-SKO (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS 

ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

(Doc. No. 21)

Plaintiff Ryan P. Davidson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 

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

On January 14, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order requiring plaintiff to 

show cause in writing within twenty-one (21) days why the action should not be dismissed due to 

his failure to prosecute. (Doc. No. 19 at 2.) Plaintiff did not respond to the order to show cause 

within the time provided1and, accordingly, on February 10, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge 

issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action be dismissed due to 

 

1 The court served the order to show cause and the subsequent pending findings and 

recommendations on plaintiff at his address of record. Both were returned to the court by the 

U.S. Postal Service as “Undeliverable, Out to Court.” As such, plaintiff has failed to keep the 

court apprised of his current address as required by Local Rule 183(b).

Case 1:18-cv-00722-DAD-SKO Document 22 Filed 02/28/20 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

plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 21.) The findings and recommendations 

were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within 

fourteen (14) days of service. (Id. at 2.) To date, no objections to the findings and 

recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the 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 February 10, 2020 (Doc. No. 21) are 

adopted in full;

2. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 27, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-00722-DAD-SKO Document 22 Filed 02/28/20 Page 2 of 2