(PC) Lopez v. CDCR

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
CHRISTIAN LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CDCR,
Defendant.
Case No. 1:24-cv-00734 JLT BAM
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
ACTION WITH PREJUDICE
(Docs. 9, 11)
Christian Lopez is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On October 23, 2025, the Cour screened the complaint and found that failed to state a
cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 9.) The Court granted Plaintiff leave to file a
first amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty days. (Id.) Plaintiff failed
to file a first amended complaint or otherwise communicate with the Court.
On December 5, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and
recommendations that recommended 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. 11.)
The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that
any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 11 at 7.) The Court advised him that the “failure
Case 1:24-cv-00734-JLT-BAM Document 12 Filed 01/05/26 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
to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of the ‘right to challenge the
magistrate’s factual findings’ on appeal.” (Id., quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838–
39 (9th Cir. 2014)). Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to do so has expired.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court performed a de novo review of this
case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes that the Findings and
Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on December 5, 2025 (Doc. 11) are
ADOPTED.
2. This action is DISMISSED, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim, failure to obey
a court order, and failure to prosecute this action.
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 3, 2026
Case 1:24-cv-00734-JLT-BAM Document 12 Filed 01/05/26 Page 2 of 2