Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00757/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00757-15/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DALE OWEN DUSTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

GIPSON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-00757 AWI DLB PC

AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS 

AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND 

DISMISSING ACTION FOR REPEATED 

FAILURE TO FOLLOW COURT ORDERS

(Document 57)

Plaintiff Dale Owen Dustin (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and 

in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on

December 13, 2014, and it was transferred to this Court on May 16, 2014. 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 June 5, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this action 

be dismissed for Plaintiff’s repeated failures to follow Court orders. The Findings and 

Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the Findings 

and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days. After this time period had passed 

without objections, the Court issued an order adopting the Findings and Recommendations and 

dismissed the case on July 20, 2015.

///

///

Case 1:14-cv-00757-DAD-BAM Document 61 Filed 07/28/15 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

On July 24, 2015, the Court docketed a motion for an extension of time to file objections. 

The motion was signed by Plaintiff on June 18, 2015. The reason for the delay in receipt and/or 

docketing is unknown.

The Court now issues this amended order adopting the June 5, 2015, Findings and 

Recommendations.

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

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings 

and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Plaintiff’s request for additional time to file objections is simply another delay on his part to 

comply with Court orders. As the Court noted in the Findings and Recommendations, this action has 

been pending for over one year and one half without an operative complaint, and Plaintiff continues 

to refuse to comply with Court orders. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 5, 2015, are ADOPTED in full; 

2. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and

3. This action is DISMISSED.

This terminates this action in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 28, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00757-DAD-BAM Document 61 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 2