Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Jesus Zavala, identified by the court as a county jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil-rights action on October 20, 2025, seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The defendant named in the caption is Sacramento County Jail. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302(c)(17).
On April 6, 2026, the magistrate judge directed Zavala to file an amended complaint within thirty days of service of that order. According to the district court's order, Zavala did not respond in any way. On May 19, 2026, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, docketed as Document No. 7, recommending dismissal without prejudice because of Zavala's failure to comply with court orders.
The findings and recommendations were served on Zavala and advised that objections were due within fourteen days. He filed no objections, and the objection period expired. A footnote adds that both the April 6 order and the findings and recommendations were mailed to his address of record but returned by the U.S. Postal Service marked "undeliverable, Not in custody." The court stated that it therefore appeared Zavala also had failed to keep the court apprised of his current address as required by the local rules.
The Court’s Holding
District Judge Dale A. Drozd reviewed the magistrate judge's conclusions of law de novo, citing Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School District, 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). After reviewing the file, the court found the pending findings and recommendations supported by both the record and the magistrate judge's analysis. The order adopted the May 19, 2026 findings and recommendations in full.
The operative disposition dismissed the action without prejudice due to Zavala's failure to comply with the court's orders, citing Local Rule 110 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Clerk of the Court was directed to close the case. The order is dated November 5, 2026, and the filed header reflects filing on November 6, 2026.
The dismissal was expressly without prejudice; the order did not describe it as a merits adjudication of the underlying civil-rights allegations. The supplied order also does not reproduce the magistrate judge's underlying findings and recommendations, so its reasoning is reported here only as summarized and adopted by the district court. The footnote concerning returned mail and the address-of-record requirement was an additional observation, not a separately stated basis for a different sanction.
Key Takeaways
- The district court adopted the May 19, 2026 findings and recommendations in full after conducting de novo review of the magistrate judge's conclusions of law.
- Zavala's Section 1983 action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders, with the court citing Local Rule 110 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
- The immediate noncompliance identified in the order was Zavala's failure to respond to the April 6, 2026 directive to file an amended complaint within thirty days of service.
- No objections to the findings and recommendations were filed within the fourteen-day objection period stated in the order.
- The court noted that returned mail marked "undeliverable, Not in custody" suggested a separate failure to update the address of record, but the operative dismissal remained without prejudice.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the district court's adoption of a magistrate judge's recommendation following de novo review and the absence of timely objections. Its stated ground for dismissal was noncompliance with court orders rather than a resolution of the merits of the Section 1983 claim.
The without-prejudice disposition and the direction to close the case should be distinguished from a final merits determination. The order also highlights the practical importance for self-represented litigants of responding to amendment directives and maintaining a current address with the court, while leaving any further proceedings outside the scope of this two-page disposition.