(PC) Rowe v. Department of Corrections, No. 1:2006cv01171 - Document 29 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING in FULL the Findings and Recommendations 28 ; ORDER GRANTING Defendant Rodriguez' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust 21 ; ORDER DISMISSING Defendant Rodriguez From This Action, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/12/10. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Rowe v. Department of Corrections Doc. 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL ROWE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 J. KURTZ, et al., 15 1:06-cv-01171-LJO-SMS-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 28.) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT RODRIGUEZ' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST (Doc. 21.) 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT RODRIGUEZ FROM THIS ACTION _____________________________/ Daniel Rowe (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 20 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 21 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 22 On February 4, 2010, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending 23 that defendant Rodriguez' motion to dismiss be granted and defendant Rodriguez be dismissed from 24 this action based on plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies against her prior to filing 25 suit. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations 26 within thirty days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings 27 and recommendations. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73- 2 305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 3 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 6 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February 7 4, 2010, are ADOPTED in full; 8 2. Defendant Rodriguez' motion to dismiss, filed on July 13, 2009, is GRANTED; 9 3. Defendant Rodriguez is dismissed from this action, based on plaintiff’s failure to 10 exhaust administrative remedies against her before filing suit; and 11 12 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to reflect the dismissal of defendant Rodriguez from this action on the court's docket. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 March 12, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
