(PC)Nogueras v. Lopez et al, No. 1:2012cv01365 - Document 45 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 44 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Denying 25 Motion for Summary Judgment for Failure to Exhaust, with Prejudice signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 07/23/2015. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 EUGENIO LUIS NOGUERAS, Plaintiff, 11 12 v. 13 S. LOPEZ, et al., 14 Defendants. _____________________________________/ Case No. 1:12-cv-01365-LJO-SKO (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST, WITH PREJUDICE (Docs. 25 and 44) 15 16 Plaintiff Eugenio Luis Nogueras, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 21, 2012. The 18 matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and 19 Local Rule 302. 20 On June 29, 2015, the Magistrate Judge recommended Defendant’s motion for summary 21 judgment for failure to exhaust be denied, with prejudice, on the ground that the exhaustion 22 requirement does not apply to former prisoners who brought suit after their release. 42 U.S.C. § 23 1997e(a); Talamantes v. Leyva, 575 F.3d 1021, 1024 (9th Cir. 2009). The fifteen-day objection 24 period has expired and neither party filed objections. 25 The Court has conducted a de novo review of this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 26 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 27 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 /// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on June 29, 2015, is adopted in full; 3 2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, filed on 4 5 November 7, 2014, is DENIED, with prejudice; and 3. 6 This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to issue an amended scheduling order. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill July 23, 2015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.