Davis v. Clark

Davis · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · June 24, 2025 · No. 1:25-cv-0229 JLT SAB (PC)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations in a prisoner civil-rights action. The court dismissed the action with prejudice for failure to state a claim, failure to prosecute, and failure to obey court orders, and directed the clerk to close the case.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Decision date
June 24, 2025
Docket number
1:25-cv-0229 JLT SAB (PC)
Procedural posture
The district court reviewed and adopted a magistrate judge's findings and recommendations recommending dismissal of a pro se prisoner's civil-rights action.
Standard of review
De novo review under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) of the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order
Parties
Keenan Dwayne Davis v. Ken Clark, et al.
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

prisoners rightssection 1983sanctionscivil procedure

Practice areas

prisoner civil rightscivil procedurefederal courts

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations should be adopted after de novo review.
  2. Whether the action should be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim, failure to obey court orders, and failure to prosecute.

Holdings

  1. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations in full after conducting de novo review.
  2. The action was dismissed with prejudice because Plaintiff failed to state a claim, failed to prosecute the action, and failed to obey the court's order.

Key quotations

This action is DISMISSED with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim, failure to prosecute, and failure to obey the Court’s order. (at 2)

Factual background

Keenan Dwayne Davis brought a civil-rights action concerning alleged violations at the Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison, Corcoran. After screening, the magistrate judge determined that the complaint failed to state a cognizable claim and gave Davis an opportunity to amend. Davis did not amend his complaint, respond to an order to show cause, or otherwise prosecute the action.

Procedural history

The magistrate judge screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), found that it failed to state a cognizable claim, and granted Plaintiff leave to amend. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint or respond to an order to show cause. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal for failure to state a claim, failure to obey court orders, and failure to prosecute. After Plaintiff failed to object, the district court conducted de novo review, adopted the findings and recommendations in full, dismissed the action with prejudice, and directed the clerk to close the case.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…