Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗
Opinion

govinfo:USCOURTS-caed-2_25-cv-02465-2

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California · 2026-06-10

· GavelSight synced 2026-09-06 03:45:11

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 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
STACY SMITH, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Defendant. 
No. 2:25-cv-2465 JAM AC PS 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 
United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 
 On May 6, 2026 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 
served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 
recommendations were to be filed within 21 days. ECF No. 16. Plaintiff has not filed objections 
to the findings and recommendations. 
 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 
supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 
ORDERED that: 
 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 6, 2026, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 

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 
 
 
 2. This action is DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for lack of prosecution and 
for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 
 
Dated: June 09, 2026 
 
 
 
 

Passage view · GavelSight