Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00026/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00026-2/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

LARRY EUGENE BOYCE,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALLEY STATE PRISON, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:20-cv-00026-DAD-GSA (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING

ACTION DUE TO PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE 

TO COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER AND 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

(Doc. No. 7)

Plaintiff Larry Eugene Boyce is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 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.

The complaint commencing this action was originally filed by fifteen plaintiffs on 

December 26, 2019. See Gann v. Valley State Prison, 1:19-cv-01797-DAD-GSA, (Doc. No. 1). 

Thereafter, on January 7, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order severing the fifteen 

plaintiffs’ claims and opened this new case for plaintiff Boyce. (Doc. No. 1.) The January 7, 

2020 order also directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint and a motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis in this case within thirty (30) days from the date of service. (Id. at 4–5.) The thirty-day 

/////

Case 1:20-cv-00026-DAD-GSA Document 8 Filed 04/27/20 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

deadline passed, and plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint, file an application to proceed 

in forma pauperis, or pay the required filing fee. 

Therefore, on March 20, 2020, the magistrate judge issued the pending findings and 

recommendations, recommending dismissal of this action, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s 

failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 7.) The pending 

findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections 

thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 3.) To date, no objections 

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), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, 

1. The March 20, 2020 findings and recommendations (Doc No. 7) are adopted in 

full; 

2. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to obey a 

court order and failure to prosecute; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 27, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00026-DAD-GSA Document 8 Filed 04/27/20 Page 2 of 2