Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00184/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00184-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRADFORD McATHUR, CASE NO. CV F 06-0184 AWI LJO

Plaintiff, ORDER TO ADOPT FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION

vs.

CITY OF TAFT POLICE DEPARTMENT,

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Bradford McAthur (“plaintiff”) was a state prisoner and proceeds pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“section 1983"). Plaintiff proceeds with his

form amended complaint (“complaint”) against defendants Taft City police officers Williams (Badge

No. 27) (“Officer Williams”) and Kinney (“Officer Kinney”). The magistrate judge’s May 22, 2006

order (“May 22 order”) required plaintiff, no later than June 7, 2006, to complete and submit to this

Court’s clerk documents for service of the summons and amended complaint on Officers Williams and

Kinney. The May 22 order admonished: “Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in

recommendation to dismiss this action.” (Bold in original.) Plaintiff has failed to submit the required

Case 1:06-cv-00184-AWI -LJO Document 30 Filed 06/27/06 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

documents to comply with the May 22 order.

The magistrate judge issued his June 9, 2006 findings and recommendations to dismiss this

action without prejudice on grounds plaintiff has failed to: (1) submit documents for service of the

summons and amended complaint; (2) comply with this Court’s order; and (3) diligently prosecute this

action.

Plaintiff filed no timely objections to the findings and recommendations.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. After

evaluating the record, this Court finds the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations are

supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, this Court:

1. ADOPTS in full the magistrate judge’s June 9, 2006 findings and recommendations;

2. DISMISSES this action without prejudice on grounds that plaintiff has failed to: (1)

submit documentsfor service of the summons and amended complaint; (2) comply with

this Court’s order; and (3) diligently prosecute this action; and

3. DIRECTS this Court’s clerk to close this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00184-AWI -LJO Document 30 Filed 06/27/06 Page 2 of 2