(PC)Gomez v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation 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
GERARDO GOMEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 1:24-cv-00225 JLT BAM
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
ACTION WITH PREJUDICE
(Docs. 8, 10)
The Court screened the complaint and found that it failed to comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 8 and failed to state a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 8.) The
Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal within
thirty days. (Id.) Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise communicate with
the Court.
On December 3, 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. 10.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on
Plaintiff and notified him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 10 at 10.) The
Court advised him that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the
Case 1:24-cv-00225-JLT-BAM Document 11 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
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 3, 2025 (Doc. 10) 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-00225-JLT-BAM Document 11 Filed 01/05/26 Page 2 of 2