(PC) Taylor v. Yates et al, No. 1:2007cv00459 - Document 27 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting Findings and Recommendations 26 , and Dismissing Action, with Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/13/2010. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Taylor v. Yates et al Doc. 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 DARRYL EUGENE TAYLOR, 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00459-AWI-SMS PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DISMISSING ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM v. JAMES A. YATES, et al., (Doc. 24 and 26) 13 Defendants. ORDER THAT THIS DISMISSAL COUNTS AS A STRIKE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) 14 15 / 16 Plaintiff Darryl Eugene Taylor, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 17 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 23, 2007. The matter was referred to 18 a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On August 3, 2010, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s third amended complaint and 20 recommended dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff was 21 notified he had thirty days within which to file objections, but none were filed 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 23 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings 24 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 3, 2010, is adopted in full; 2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim; and 27 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 3. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: 0m8i78 November 13, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.