(PC) Storm v. Office of the California Governor, et al.

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 10 Findings and Recommendations to Dismiss Action for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies, signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 01/07/2025. CASE CLOSED. (Deputy Clerk CM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DIMITRI Z. STORM,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
OFFICE OF THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR, et al.,

15
16

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:24-cv-917 KES-EPG
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS ACTION
FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Doc. 10

17
18

Dimitri Storm is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

19

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Docs. 1, 7. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate

20

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

21

The assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

22

On September 17, 2024, the magistrate judge ordered plaintiff to show cause why the action should not

23

be dismissed for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Doc. 8. Plaintiff failed to respond to

24

the order. See Docket. On November 7, 2024, the magistrate judge issued findings and

25

recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for plaintiff’s failure

26

to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this action. Doc. 10. Specifically, the findings

27

and recommendations found that plaintiff’s August 8, 2024, complaint alleged conduct occurring

28
1

1

between July 20 and August 8, 2024. Id. at 3. Accordingly, there was “simply not enough time for

2

Plaintiff to follow [the] prison’s grievance procedure and fully exhaust his claims before filing his suit.”

3

Id. The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any

4

objections thereto were to be filed within thirty (30) days after service. Id. at 4. Plaintiff did not file

5

any objections, and the deadline to do so has passed.

6

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case.

7

Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendations are

8

supported by the record and proper analysis.

9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

10

1. The findings and recommendations issued on November 7, 2024, Doc. 10, are adopted in full;

11

2. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, for plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative

12
13

remedies prior to filing suit; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

14
15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 7, 2025
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2