Boyd v. Etchebehere et al
Filing
37
ORDER ADOPTING 31 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING Defendant's 20 Motion for Summary Judgment for Failure to Exhaust the Administrative Remedies, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 9/1/15. (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CURTIS BOYD,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
C. ETCHEBEHERE,
15
Defendant.
16
Case No.1:13-01966-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION, DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST THE
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
[ECF Nos. 20, 31, 33]
Plaintiff Curtis Boyd is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On April 1, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was
20
served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that objections to the Findings and
21
Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Defendant filed objections on April 23, 2015.
22
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de
23
novo review of this case. Given the circumstances of this case (as explained in the Findings and
24
Recommendation), the Court finds that Plaintiff has exhausted the administrative remedies with
25
respect to his First Amendment claim against C. Etchebehere. Thus, having carefully reviewed the
26
entire file, including Defendant’s objections, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be
27
supported by the record and by proper analysis.
28
///
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
The Findings and Recommendation, filed on April 1, 2015, is adopted in full; and
3
2.
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust the administrative
4
remedies is DENIED.
5
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
September 1, 2015
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?