Dews v. Brown et al

Filing 32

ORDER Adopting 26 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Action, With Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim for Relief; ORDER That Dismissal Is Subject to Three Strikes Provision Under 28 USC 1915(G), signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 4/22/13. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
CLARENCE LEON DEWS,

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00278-AWI-SKO PC

8
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE
TO STATE A CLAIM FOR RELIEF

9
v.
10
EDMUND G. BROWN, et al.,
11

(Docs. 22 and 26)
Defendants.

12

ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO
THREE STRIKES PROVISION UNDER 28
U.S.C. § 1915(G)

13
/
14
15

Plaintiff Clarence Leon Dews, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action

16

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 21, 2012. The matter was referred to a United States

17

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

18

On March 13, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations screening

19

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint and recommending dismissal of the action, with prejudice,

20

for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff filed a timely Objection on April 15, 2013.

21

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de

22

novo review of this case. Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 F.3d 1202, 1208 (9th Cir. 2012). Having carefully

23

reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the

24

record and by proper analysis. Id. Plaintiff’s disjoined Objection sets forth no grounds which

25

persuade the Court that the Findings and Recommendations should not be adopted in full. Id.

26
27

///

28

///
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed March 13, 2013, is adopted in full;

3

2.

This action is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief

4
5

may be granted; and
3.

This dismissal is subject to the “three-strikes” provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011).

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated:
0m8i78

April 22, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2