Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01834/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01834-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

 The plaintiff’s actual name is Gregory E. Howard. He filed this action using his alias – Gregory E. Williams.

1

(Docket Entry dated June 6, 2007). The caption of this order has been changed to reflect his actual and alias names.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY E. HOWARD, Case No. 06-cv-1834 OWW TAG 1

a/k/a Gregory E. Williams,

 

Plaintiff, ORDER TO ADOPT FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS

vs. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(Doc. 8)

STATE OFFICIALS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

On December 18, 2007, Plaintiff Gregory E. Howard, also known as Gregory E. Williams

(“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

(Doc. 1). On May 7, 2007, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s complaint, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and issued an order dismissing the complaint, without prejudice, for failure to 

state a claim upon which relief could be granted and to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

8(a). (Doc. 6). The Magistrate Judge granted Plaintiff thirty (30) days to file an amended complaint. 

(Doc. 6). The order initially was served on Gregory E. Williams, but was re-served on Gregory E.

Howard when this Court was apprised that Plaintiff’s true surname was Howard, not Williams. 

(Docs. 6, 7; Docket Entries dated June 6, 2007 and June 8, 2007). 

On August 14, 2007, after more than the allotted time had passed without Plaintiff having

filed his amended complaint, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations, in which

she recommended that Plaintiff’s action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with

Case 1:06-cv-01834-OWW -TAG Document 9 Filed 11/20/07 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

the May 7, 2007, Court order, pursuant to Local Rule 11-110. (Doc. 8). The Findings and

Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed

within fifteen (15) days of the date of service. To date, no objections have been filed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 72(b), and Local Rule 72-304, 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 filed on August 14, 2007, are supported by the record and by the Magistrate

Judge’s analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 8), filed August 14, 2007, are ADOPTED IN

FULL;

2. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 19, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01834-OWW -TAG Document 9 Filed 11/20/07 Page 2 of 2