Ransom v. Aguirre et al

Filing 132

ORDER ADOPTING 131 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims for Failure to Exhaust signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/26/2016. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

12

No. 1:12-cv-01343-DAD-DLB (PC)

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

AGUIRRE, et al.,

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS FOR FAILURE TO
EXHAUST
Defendants.
(Doc. No. 131)

16
17
18

Plaintiff Bryan E. Ransom (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil

19

rights action. Defendants paid the filing fee and removed the action to this court on August 16,

20

2012.

21

On December 16, 2015, the magistrate judge to whom the case was referred pursuant to

22

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 held an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether

23

plaintiff had properly exhausted his administrative remedies prior to bringing suit as required.

24

(Doc. No. 113.) On March 11, 2016, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations

25

recommending that certain claims alleged in plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed due to his failure

26

to exhaust those claims. (Doc. No. 131.) Those findings and recommendations were served on

27

the parties and contained notice that any objections must be filed within thirty days. Neither party

28

has filed objections, and the time period in which to do so has passed.
1

1

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

2

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings

3

and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

4

For the reasons set forth above:

5

1. The findings and recommendations filed March 11, 2016 (Doc. No. 131) are adopted in

6

full;

7

2. The following claims are dismissed without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to exhaust

8

administrative remedies:
a. Plaintiff’s federal claims related to events occurring after July 11, 2011, that

9
10

(i) he informed Warden Hubbard that medical staff refused to increase his

11

liquid diet, and officials were misinterpreting Operating Procedure 1051;

12

and

13

(ii) defendant Kernan was placed on notice that prison officials were

14

withholding food, but failed to intervene; and

15

b. the remaining state law claims; and

16
17
18

3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further scheduling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 26, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2