Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01600/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01600-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLEVELAND ZACHARY ROSE,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. JOHAL, et al.,

Defendants.

1:18-cv-01600-LJO-SKO (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

ACTION

(Doc. 17)

Plaintiff Cleveland Zachary Rose 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 August 13, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order finding that Plaintiff

failed to state a cognizable claim and requiring Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. (Doc. 12.) 

Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or to otherwise respond to the order. Thus, on 

October 29, 2019, the magistrate judge issued an order to show cause (OSC), within 21 days, why 

this action should not be dismissed. (Doc. 15.) Plaintiff failed to respond to the OSC.

Accordingly, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to dismiss this action for 

Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim and to comply with a court order. (Doc. 17.) Plaintiff has not 

filed objections, and the time to do so has passed. (See id.)

///

Case 1:18-cv-01600-LJO-SKO Document 18 Filed 01/06/20 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

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 file, the Court finds the findings and 

recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 6, 2019, (Doc. 17), are 

ADOPTED in full;

2. This action is DISMISSED; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-01600-LJO-SKO Document 18 Filed 01/06/20 Page 2 of 2