Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01022/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01022-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT K. RICKS,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. DAVIS,

Defendant.

No. 1:18-cv-01022-DAD-SKO (PC) 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

ACTION

(Doc. No. 21)

Plaintiff Scott K. Ricks is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 October 23, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge ordered plaintiff to show cause in 

writing, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed due to his failure to prosecute

this action. (Doc. No. 18.) Plaintiff failed to respond to that order. Accordingly, on December 3, 

2019, the magistrate judge filed the pending findings and recommendations, recommending that 

this action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action and obey a court order. 

(Doc. No. 21.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice 

that any objections thereto were to be filed within 14 days of service. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff has not 

filed objections to those findings and recommendations and the time do so has since passed.

/////

Case 1:18-cv-01022-DAD-SKO Document 23 Filed 04/07/20 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 entire file, the court finds the findings 

and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly,

1. The December 3, 2019 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 21) are adopted

in full;

2. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action and obey

a court order; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 7, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-01022-DAD-SKO Document 23 Filed 04/07/20 Page 2 of 2