White v. Patel et al

Filing 38

ORDER ADOPTING 34 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER DENYING Defendant Chen and Patel's 26 Motion to Dismiss; ORDER REFERRING Case Back to Magistrate Judge for Further Proceedings, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 3/18/2014. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JEROME WHITE,

12

1:11-cv-00047-AWI-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

13

vs.

14

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. 34.)

PATEL, et al.,

15

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS CHEN
AND PATEL’S MOTION TO DISMISS
(Doc. 26.)

Defendants.

16

ORDER REFERRING CASE BACK TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS

17
18
19

Jerome White (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 December 13, 2013, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending

23

that Defendants Chen and Patel’s (“Defendants”) motion to dismiss be denied. (Doc. 34.) On

24

January 13, 2013, Defendants filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. 35.)

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

26

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

27

including Defendants’ objections, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be

28

supported by the record and proper analysis. The primary issue before the Court is whether a
1

1

claim is deemed exhausted if prison officials consider a late grievance. Based on the reasoning

2

explained in the Magistrate Judge’s cited cases, the Court finds exhaustion completed in this

3

action.

4

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

5

1.

6
7

December 13, 2013, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and
2.

8
9

The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on

Defendants Chen and Patel’s motion to dismiss, filed on August 22, 2013, is
DENIED; and

3.

This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 18, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
2