(PC) Jackson v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2007cv01414 - Document 40 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 39 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DENYING 32 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/27/2010. (Bradley, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Jackson v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al Doc. 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 FATEEM L. JACKSON, 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01414-LJO-SMS PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., 14 (Docs. 32 & 39) Defendants. / 15 16 Plaintiff Fateem L. Jackson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 17 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On April 21, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein, on 20 the motion to dismiss1 filed by Defendants Selbach, Rubin, Payan, Pantoja, Wood, Yoder, Carrasco, 21 and Zanchi, which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any 22 objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Neither side 23 filed any objection(s). 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 25 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings 26 27 28 1 The motion sought dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies on Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Pantoja, Payan, Rubin, Selbach, W ood, and Yoder under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) and all moving Defendants asserted that they were entitled to qualified immunity. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. 4 The Findings and Recommendations, filed April 21, 2010 (Doc. 39), is adopted in full; and 5 2. 6 The motion to dismiss filed, on November 23, 2009 (Doc. 32), by Defendants Selbach, Rubin, Payan, Pantoja, Wood, Yoder, Carrasco, and Zanchi is DENIED. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 May 27, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.