Gordon Bullock v. Warden Elvin Valenzuela et al

Filing 9

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Percy Anderson. IT IS ORDERED that Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action without prejudice. (See Order for complete details) (afe)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GORDON BULLOCK,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
15

WARDEN ELVIN VALENZUELA,
et. al.,

16

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO.

CV 15-2491-PA (AS)

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636, the Court has reviewed the
21
Complaint, all of the records herein, and the Report and Recommendation
22
of United States Magistrate Judge.

After having made a de novo

23
determination of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which
24
Objections were directed (see Docket Entry No. 8), the Court concurs
25
with and accepts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
26
However, the Court addresses certain arguments raised in the Objections
27
below.
28

1

Plaintiff contends that his complaint is directed to the prison

2

officials’ failure to timely process his grievance regarding the loss

3

of his 30-day good time credit rather than a challenge to the sentence

4

imposed for the disciplinary violation.

5

However, “inmates lack a separate constitutional entitlement to a

6

specific prison grievance procedure[,]” and the failure to properly

7

process an inmate’s grievance does not give rise to a cognizable

8

constitutional claim.

9

2003); Buckley v. Barlow, 997 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir. 1993) (per

10

curiam) (“‘A prison grievance procedure is a procedural right only, it

11

does not confer any substantive right upon the inmates. Hence, it does

12

not give rise to a protected liberty interest requiring the procedural

13

protections envisioned by the fourteenth amendment.’ Thus, defendants’

14

failure to process any of [the inmate’s] grievances, without more, is

15

not actionable under section 1983.” (citation and internal punctuation

16

omitted)).

17

Recommendation do not cause the Court to reconsider its decision to

18

accept the Magistrate Judge’s conclusions and recommendations.

See Docket Entry No. 8.

Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir.

Accordingly, Petitioner’s objections to the Report and

19
IT IS ORDERED that Judgment shall be entered dismissing this

20
21

action without prejudice.

22

///

23

///

24

///

25
26
27
28
2

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order

2

and the Judgment herein on Plaintiff at his current address of record.

3
4

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

5
6

DATED: September 23, 2015.

7
8
9

PERCY ANDERSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3