Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00729/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00729-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SALADIN RUSHDAN, aka,

ROBERT WOODS, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0729 GEB GGH P

vs.

TOM PERBULA, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 21, 2006, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with leave

to amend. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s amended complaint filed December 7, 2006. 

Named as defendants are Director of the California Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation (CDCR) Dovey, Warden Palmer, Associate Warden Stratton, Correctional

Sergeant Hall, Correctional Counselor Permbula and Health Care Analyst Van Cor. Plaintiff

alleges that defendants violated a settlement agreement he entered into with CDCR in 1994. 

Plaintiff alleges that the settlement agreement was reached in an action filed in the United States

District Court for the Northern District of California, C-90-2895 THE.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00729-GEB-KJN Document 13 Filed 12/26/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

As stated in the November 21, 2006, order, this court has jurisdiction to consider

plaintiff’s claim only if the action in which the settlement agreement was reached was filed in

this court and the settlement agreement provided that the court retained jurisdiction. 18 U.S.C. §

3626(c)(2); see also Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 114 S. Ct. 1674 (1994). 

Because the settlement agreement was reached in the United States District for the Northern

District of California, this court does not have jurisdiction to consider plaintiff’s claims,

regardless of whether the settlement was reached in private. Accordingly, the court recommends

that this action be dismissed.

Plaintiff may file a new civil rights action in this court alleging violation of his

rights at California State Prison-Sacramento, where he is now housed. The new action should not

include claims regarding violation of his settlement agreement.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 12/26/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

wood729.ame

Case 2:06-cv-00729-GEB-KJN Document 13 Filed 12/26/06 Page 2 of 2