(PC) Williams v. California Department of Corrections et al, No. 1:2007cv01855 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING in FULL the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 ; ORDER DISMISSING Action, With Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim; ORDER for This Dismissal to Count as a Strike Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); ORDER DIRECTING Clerk to Close Case, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/7/11. (CASE CLOSED)(Hellings, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Williams v. California Department of Corrections et al Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLIFFORD J. WILLIAMS, 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 15 16 1:07-cv-01855-LJO-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 23.) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 17 ORDER FOR THIS DISMISSAL TO COUNT AS A STRIKE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) 18 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO CLOSE CASE Defendants. 19 20 _____________________________/ Clifford J. Williams (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 21 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 22 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 23 On May 23, 2011, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 24 this action be dismissed based on plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 25 granted. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 26 recommendations within thirty days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise 27 responded to the findings and recommendations. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, 1 2 this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on May 23, 6 2011, are adopted in full; 7 2. This action is dismissed with prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to state a claim; 8 3. This dismissal shall count as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and 9 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 Dated: b9ed48 July 7, 2011 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
