(PC) Rabb v. Figueroa

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAMEN D. RABB, Case No. 1:23-cv-0843 JLT SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDTIONS DENYING 13 v. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 14 ESTEVEN FIGUEROA, et al., (Docs. 30, 31) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Isaiah J. Petillo seeks to hold the defendants, both correctional officers at Kern Valley 18 State Prison, liable for violations of his civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 (See generally Doc. 1.) Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment relating to exhaustion of 20 the administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. (Doc. 30.) The magistrate 21 judge recommended that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied, after finding that 22 Plaintiff “is not required to plead and/or prove exhaustion of the administrative remedies because 23 it is an affirmative defense.” (Doc. 31 at 1-2.) 24 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that 25 any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 31 at 3.) The Court advised Plaintiff the “failure to 26 file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing 27 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections and 28 the time to do so has passed. 1 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 2 | case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 3 | Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 20, 2024 (Doc. 31) are 5 ADOPTED in full. 6 2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 30) is DENIED. 7 g IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 | Dated: _ March 19, 2024 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28