1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 DA’JUAN BIRDEN, Case No. 1:25-cv-00937 JLT BAM
12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING
13 v. ACTION, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF
COURT TO CLOSE THIS CASE
14 F. MUNOZ,
(Doc. 13)
15 Defendant.
16
17 Da’Juan Birden is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
18 civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19 On October 8, 2025, the magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations that
20 recommended dismissal of this action as an appropriate sanction for failure to obey a court order
21 and for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. 13.) The Court served the Findings and
22 Recommendations on plaintiff and notified him that any objections were due within fourteen (14)
23 days. (Id. at 3.) The Court also informed plaintiff that “failure to file objections within the
24 specified time may result in the waiver of the ‘right to challenge the magistrate’s factual findings’
25 on appeal.” (Id. at 4, quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff
26 failed to file objections, and the time in which to do has expired.
27 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the
28 case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s objections, the Court finds
1 | that the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus,
2 | the Court ORDERS:
3 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on October 8, 2025 (Doc. 13) are
4 ADOPTED.
5 2. This action is DISMISSED.
6 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
7
g IT IS SO ORDERED.
9 Dated: _ November 7, 2025 Cerin | Tower
TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.