-SKO (PC) Gregory Rodriguez v. Hopkins, No. 1:2009cv02184 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING Defendant's 15 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and for Failure to Exhaust, and Requiring Defendant to File a Response to Plaintiff's Complaint Within Twenty Days, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/23/2011. (Responses to Complaint Due Within Twenty (20) Days.) (Marrujo, C)
Download PDF
-SKO (PC) Gregory Rodriguez v. Hopkins Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 GREGORY RODRIGUEZ, 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02184-AWI-SKO PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST, AND REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO FILE A RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT WITHIN TWENTY DAYS v. HOPKINS, Defendant. 14 (Docs. 15 and 22) 15 / 16 Plaintiff Gregory Rodriguez, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights 17 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 16, 2009. The matter was referred to a United 18 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 This action is proceeding against Defendant Hopkins for use of excessive physical force, in 20 violation of the Eighth Amendment. On June 6, 2011, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss 21 Plaintiff’s due process claim for failure to state a claim and to dismiss the action for failure to 22 exhaust. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b). On August 12, 2011, the Magistrate Judge 23 filed a Findings and Recommendations recommending that Defendant’s motion to dismiss be denied. 24 The parties were given fifteen days within which to file objections, but no objections were filed. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 26 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings 27 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 12, 2011, is adopted in full; 3 2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed June 6, 2011, is DENIED; and 4 3. Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiff’s complaint within twenty (20) days from 5 6 the date of service of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: 0m8i78 December 23, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2