(PC) Galicia v. Marsh et al, No. 1:2016cv00011 - Document 63 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER adopting 61 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, granting in part and denying in part 40 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/17/2017. (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE GALICIA, 12 No. 1:16-cv-00011-DAD-SAB Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 T. MARSH et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. Nos. 40, 61) 17 18 19 Plaintiff Jose Galicia is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 20 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 21 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On June 8, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 23 recommending that the motion for summary judgment brought on behalf of defendants M. 24 Jennings and A. Guzman based upon plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies 25 prior to filing suit be granted as to defendant Guzman and denied as to defendant Jennings. (Doc. 26 No. 61.) Those findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice 27 that objections thereto were to be filed within thirty days. (Id.) The time to file objections has 28 passed, and no objections have been filed. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 2 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 3 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, 5 1. The June 8, 2017 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 61) are adopted in full; 6 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part; 7 3. Plaintiff’s claim against defendant Guzman is dismissed, without prejudice, due to 8 plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to that claim 9 prior to filing suit as required; and 10 4. This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent 11 12 13 with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 17, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2