Thomas v. Wilber et al
Filing
49
ORDER DENYING 31 Motion to Dismiss ; ORDER ADOPTING 45 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDERED to be referred back to Magistrate Judge to issue an Amended Scheduling Order, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 08/03/2012. (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
JASON LATRELL THOMAS,
CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00006-AWI-SKO PC
9
Plaintiff,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR
FAILURE TO EXHAUST, AND REFERRING
MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TO ISSUE AN AMENDED SCHEDULING
ORDER
10
v.
11
M. WILBER, et al.,
12
Defendants.
13
(Docs. 31 and 45)
14
/
15
16
Plaintiff Jason Latrell Thomas, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed
17
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 4, 2010. The matter was referred to
18
a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
19
On June 20, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a findings and recommendations
20
recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust be denied. 42 U.S.C. §
21
1997e(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b). The fifteen-day objection period has expired and no objections were
22
filed.
23
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case.
24
Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be
25
supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
26
1.
The Court adopts the findings and recommendations filed on June 20, 2012, in full;
27
2.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust, filed on October 11, 2011, is
28
DENIED; and
1
1
3.
2
3
This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to issue an amended scheduling
order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
5
Dated:
0m8i78
August 3, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?