(PC) Hopson v. Chavez et al

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
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RYAN JOEL HOPSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHAVEZ, et al.,
Defendants.
No. 1:24-cv-00474 JLT BAM (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS
ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE
TO STATE A CLAIM, FAILURE TO OBEY A
COURT ORDER, AND FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE
(Doc. 12)
Ryan Joel Hopson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action pursuant to 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 November 18, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued a screening order granting
Plaintiff leave to file a first amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty
(30) days. (Doc. 10.) Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the Court’s order would
result in a recommendation for dismissal of this action, with prejudice. (Id.) Plaintiff did not file
an amended complaint or otherwise communicate with the court.
On January 5, 2026, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations
recommending dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A, failure to obey a court order, and for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action.
(Doc. 12.) The Court served the findings and recommendations on the Plaintiff and informed him
Case 1:24-cv-00474-JLT-BAM Document 13 Filed 02/05/26 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
that any objections were due in 14 days. (Id.) The Court also warned Plaintiff that failure to
timely file objections may result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual
findings” on appeal. (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–39 (9th Cir. 2014).)
Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise communicated with the Court, and the deadline to
do so has expired.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the
case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the findings and
recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 5, 2026, (Doc. 12), are ADOPTED
IN FULL.
2. This action is DISMISSED, with prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to state a claim,
failure to obey a court order, and failure to prosecute.
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 5, 2026
Case 1:24-cv-00474-JLT-BAM Document 13 Filed 02/05/26 Page 2 of 2