(PC) Rivera v. Walburn

District Court, E.D. California·Decided May 15, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-00622·Unknown

Opinion

JASON RIVERA, No. 2:19-cv-0622 WBS CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER WALBURN, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 9, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. MASS 2 LDU VME CRS NE MUO OI ee AY ee

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 9, 2020, are adopted in full; 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 29) is granted; 3. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to bringing this action; and 4. This case be closed. Dated: May 15, 2020 lt bloom 2 be UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE rive0622.801

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Rivera v. Walburn, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

(PC) Rivera v. Walburn ((PC) Rivera v. Walburn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alumino-Thermic Corp. v. Goldschmidt Thermit Co.
25 F.2d 206 (Third Circuit, 1928)