govinfo:USCOURTS-cand-3_26-cv-02481-2

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 
United States District Court 
Northern District of California 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
EUGENE HART, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
 
LYNETTE LEWIS, 
Defendant. 
 

 
 
ORDER DISMISSING CASE 
WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND 
 
 
Plaintiff is proceeding in this case in forma pauperis. On April 2, 2026, a magistrate judge 
issued an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to state a 
cognizable claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff was given until April 17, 2026, to file a 
new complaint, but he did not do so. The magistrate judge therefore issued a report and 
recommendation that this case be dismissed without leave to amend. Plaintiff was given two 
weeks to file an objection to the report and recommendation, but he did not do so. The report and 
recommendation correctly concludes that the complaint fails to state a cognizable claim, and 
Plaintiff has in any event forfeited any objection to that conclusion. The case is therefore 
dismissed without leave to amend. 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
Dated: June 8, 2026 
______________________________________ 

 
ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND 

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 
United States District Court 
Northern District of California 
RICHARD SEEBORG 
Chief United States District Judge 
 
 

Passage view · GavelSight