Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01150/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01150-8/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Chen
Defendant
Damon Newquist
Plaintiff
Soa
Defendant

Document Text:

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

DAMON NEWQUIST,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOA; CHEN,

Defendants.

No. 1:17-cv-01150-NONE-SKO (PC) 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. Nos. 40, 42)

Plaintiff Damon Newquist 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 December 3, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order granting the 

defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff’s deposition and responses to defendants’ written 

discovery requests. (Doc. No. 39.) The magistrate judge also ordered plaintiff to show cause in 

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

(Id.) Plaintiff failed to respond to defendants’ discovery requests, appear for his deposition, or 

respond to the court’s order to show cause as required. Accordingly, on December 31, 2019, the 

defendants filed a motion to dismiss this action with prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to 

prosecute this action. (Doc. No. 40.)

/////

Case 1:17-cv-01150-DAD-SKO Document 43 Filed 03/04/20 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

On February 4, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 

recommending that defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and this action dismissed with 

prejudice. (Doc. No. 42.) 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 and the time do so has passed.

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 findings and recommendations issued on February 4, 2020 (Doc. No. 42) are 

adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 40) is granted;

3. This action is dismissed with prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and 

obey court orders; and,

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 4, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:17-cv-01150-DAD-SKO Document 43 Filed 03/04/20 Page 2 of 2