(PC) Waters v. Zamora, No. 1:2010cv01643 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Action For Failure to State a Claim, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/29/2011. Dismissal Counts as STRIKE Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(G). CASE CLOSED (Strike). (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
(PC) Waters v. Zamora Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 MICHAEL LYNN WATERS, 9 Plaintiff, 10 11 CASE NO. 1:10-CV-01643-AWI-DLB PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM v. ZAMORA, (DOC. 22) 12 Defendants. 13 / DISMISSAL COUNTS AS STRIKE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) 14 15 Plaintiff Michael Lynn Waters (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se 16 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 17 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On May 12, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was 19 served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and 20 Recommendations was to be filed within twenty-one days. Doc. 22. Plaintiff filed an Objection to 21 the Findings and Recommendations on May 26, 2011. Doc. 23. 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 23 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 24 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Plaintiff’s exhibits in 25 support of his amended complaint do not cure the deficiencies in Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 26 claim. 27 To the extent that Plaintiff alleges a due process violation, Plaintiff fails to state a claim. 28 Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a liberty interest in an accurate central file. See Sandin v. Conner, 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995) (holding prisoners have a protected liberty interest for “atypical and 2 significant hardships on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life”). 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 12, 2011, is adopted in full; 5 2. This action is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; 6 3. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and 7 4. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 0m8i78 July 29, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.