(PC) Jones v. PVSP, et al, No. 1:2001cv05287 - Document 152 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL 149 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; DENYING 142 Motion to Dismiss; Action is referred to Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/11/2010. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
(PC) Jones v. PVSP, et al Doc. 152 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 TYRONE JONES, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 CASE NO. 1:01-cv-05287-AWI-SMS PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST v. PLEASANT VALLEY STATE PRISON, et al., (Docs. 142 and 149) 13 Defendants. 14 / 15 Plaintiff Tyrone Jones is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 16 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 17 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On May 28, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which 19 was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the 20 Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. More than thirty days have 21 passed and no objections 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 May 28, 2010, is adopted in full; 27 /// 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, filed February 10, 2010, is denied; and 2 3. This action is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 3 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: 0m8i78 July 11, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.