(PC) Coats v. Chaudhri, et al., No. 1:2013cv02032 - Document 97 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS regarding Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 96 signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 9/30/2019. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM THOMAS COATS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. CHAUDHRI, et al., Case No. 1:13-cv-02032-AWI-BAM (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 96) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff William Thomas Coats (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This 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 6, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and 21 recommendations that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted as to Plaintiff’s federal claims on 22 the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and the Court decline to 23 exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims and dismiss those claims 24 without prejudice. (ECF No. 96.) The findings and recommendations were served on the parties, 25 and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (Id. at 9–10.) 26 No objections have been filed, and the time to do so has expired. 27 28 In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and 1 1 recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 6, 2019, (ECF No. 96), are 4 adopted in full; 5 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 92), is granted as to Plaintiff’s federal 6 claims on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies; 7 3. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law 8 claims against Defendants Gladden, Nguyen, Gundran, Convalecer, and Fairchild, and 9 those claims are dismissed without prejudice; and 10 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 11 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 30, 2019 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.