(PC) Buchanan v. Chavez, No. 1:2013cv00425 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting Findings and Recommendations, Dismissing Action with Prejudice for Failure to State a Claim Under Section 1983, and Directing Clerk of Court to Enter Judgment 13 ; ORDER that Dismissal is Subject to 28 USC 1915(G), signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/14/13. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 TORRY BUCHANAN, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 Case No. 1:13-cv-00425-AWI-MJS (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UNDER SECTION 1983, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT v. FRANK X. CHAVEZ, Defendant. 13 ECF NO. 13 14 ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(G) 15 16 17 Plaintiff Torry Buchanan, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 22, 2013. The matter was referred 19 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 30, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a findings and recommendations 21 recommending dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 13.) 22 The thirty-day deadline to file an objection was October 30, 2013, and Plaintiff did not object or 23 otherwise respond to the findings and recommendations. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 25 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 26 Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 27 analysis. 28 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. full; 3 4 The Findings and Recommendations, filed September 30, 2013, are adopted in 2. Plaintiff’s action is DISMISSED, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim under section 1983; 5 6 3. The Clerk of the Court shall CLOSE this case; and 7 4. This dismissal is subject to the “three-strikes” provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 8 1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011). 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 Dated: November 14, 2013 SENIOR 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.