Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00688/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00688-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 462
Nature of Suit: Naturalization, Petition For Hearing of Denial
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

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

MUSTAFA YOUSIF AL BAYATI,

Plaintiff,

v.

UR MENDOZA JADDOU, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:23-cv-00688-DAD-SCR (PS)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

THIS ACTION

(Doc. No. 5)

Plaintiff Mustafa Yousif Al Bayati, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action on April 

13, 2023. (Doc. No. 1.) 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 April 19, 2024, the then-assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations recommending that the complaint be dismissed in its entirety due to plaintiff’s 

failure to prosecute this action and failure to comply with a court order. (Doc. No. 9 at 3.) 

Specifically, the magistrate judge found that no defendant had appeared in this action and plaintiff 

had failed to respond to an order requiring him to show cause in writing why the case should not 

be dismissed due to his failure to effect service within the time provided by Rule 4 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure. (Id. at 2; Doc. No. 8.) The pending findings and recommendations 

were served upon plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within 

fourteen (14) days of the date of service. (Doc. No. 9 at 3.) To date, plaintiff has not filed any 

Case 2:23-cv-00688-DAD-SCR Document 11 Filed 01/15/25 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

objections to those findings and recommendations and the time in which to do so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

pending findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly,

1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 19, 2024 (Doc. No. 9) are 

adopted in full;

2. The operative complaint (Doc. No. 1) is dismissed, without prejudice; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 14, 2025 

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:23-cv-00688-DAD-SCR Document 11 Filed 01/15/25 Page 2 of 2