Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00666/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00666-5/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

RONALD S. MILLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

EL DORADO COUNTY JAIL,

Defendant.

No. 2:23-cv-00666-DAD-EFB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

ACTION DUE TO PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE 

TO PROSECUTE 

(Doc. No. 26)

Plaintiff Ronald S. Miller is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action brought 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.

On September 18, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations recommending this action be dismissed, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s 

failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 26.) In particular, on August 7, 2023, the court 

screened plaintiff’s complaint, explained the deficiencies therein, and granted plaintiff thirty days 

in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. (Doc. No. 24.) To date, plaintiff 

has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise communicated with the court. Accordingly, the 

pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff by mail at his address of record 

and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after 

/////

Case 2:23-cv-00666-DAD-EFB Document 27 Filed 01/11/24 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

service.

1

 (Doc. No. 26 at 2.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the pending findings and 

recommendations and the time to do so has long since 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 findings and recommendations issued on September 18, 2023 (Doc. No. 26) 

are adopted in full;

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

this action; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 10, 2024 

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

 The service copy of the findings and recommendations was returned to the court marked as 

“undeliverable” on October 2, 2023. A party appearing without counsel must keep the court and 

all parties apprised of his current address. E.D. Cal. L.R. 183(b). If mail directed to such a 

plaintiff is returned by the postal service, and plaintiff fails to notify the court and opposing 

parties within 63 days thereafter of his current address, the court may dismiss the action without 

prejudice for failure to prosecute. Id. Plaintiff has yet to advise the court of his current address as 

required by Local Rule 183(b), and the time for doing so has passed.

Case 2:23-cv-00666-DAD-EFB Document 27 Filed 01/11/24 Page 2 of 2