(PC) Heim v. Doe et al, No. 1:2020cv00391 - Document 33 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 32 Findings and Recommendations and dismissing case with prejudice for failure to state a claim signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/17/2021. CASE CLOSED. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 CHRISTOPHER HEIM, 7 Plaintiff, 8 9 CASE NO. 1:20-cv-00391-AWI-GSA (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM v. JANE DOE, et al., 10 Defendants. (Doc. No. 32) 11 12 13 Plaintiff Christopher Heim is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with 14 this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 15 magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). 16 On November 1, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 17 recommendations, recommending that this case be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a 18 claim. Doc. No. 32. The pending findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and 19 contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days from the date of 20 service. Id. To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed with the 21 Court, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 23 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 24 the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 25 26 ORDER 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. The findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 32) that were issued on November 1, 1 2 2021, are ADOPTED in full; 2. 3 4 Plaintiff’s third-amended complaint (Doc. No. 22) is DISMISSED, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim; and 3. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: December 17, 2021 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 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.