Joe Navarro v. R. C. Johnson

• Court: District Court, C.D. California
• Decided: July 15, 2022
• Docket: 2:21-cv-01417
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Case 2:21-cv-01417-SSS-ADS Document 31 Filed 07/15/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:119

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 JOE NAVARRO, Case No. 2:21-01417 SSS (ADS)

12 Plaintiff,

13 v. ORDER ACCEPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 14 R.C. JOHNSON, et al., RECOMMENDATION

15 Defendants.

16 17 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended Civil 18 Rights Complaint and the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 19 Judge. No objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. The Court accepts 20 the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 ase 2:21-cv-01417-SSS-ADS Document 31 Filed 07/15/22 Page2of2 Page ID#:12

1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 2 1. The Report and Recommendation is accepted, (Dkt. No. 28); 3 2, This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as required under the Prison Litigation Reform 4 Act?; and

5 3. Judgment is to be entered accordingly. DATED: July 15, 2022 7 THE HONORABM SUNSHINE S. SYKES 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 . . . . . 1 The Report and Recommendation’s introduction contains a typographical error where 51 || it states the recommendation is a dismissal with prejudice. (Dkt. No. 28 at 2.) There is no reference or analysis in the Report and Recommendation suggesting the dismissal is 59 || with prejudice. Dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act must be without prejudice. See Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 23 1164, 1170 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[A] district court must dismiss a case without prejudice ‘when there is no presuit exhaustion,’ even if there is exhaustion while suit is pending.” 24 (quoting McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir. 2002))).