(PC) Haley v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al, No. 1:2013cv00226 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting 16 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER Dismissing Action, with Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief May be Granted Under Section 1983; ORDER That Dismissal is Subject to 28 USC 1915(g); ORDER for Clerk to Close Case, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/1/15. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DONOVAN L. HALEY, 12 13 14 15 16 1:13-cv-00226-AWI-GSA-PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 16.) vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED UNDER SECTION 1983 Defendants. 17 ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g) 18 ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE 19 20 Donovan L. Haley (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 21 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 April 7, 2015, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that this 24 action be dismissed based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 25 granted under §1983. Plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file objections to the 26 findings and recommendations. Plaintiff requested and was granted a thirty-day extension of 27 time to file objections. (Docs. 17, 18.) Plaintiff’s latest deadline has now expired, and Plaintiff 28 has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 2 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 3 including plaintiff’s objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 4 supported by the record and proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 6 1. 7 8 2015, are adopted in full; 2. 9 10 This action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on plaintiff=s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983; 3. 11 12 The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 7, This dismissal is subject to the Athree-strikes@ provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011); and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 1, 2015 SENIOR 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.