Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06645/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06645-4/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

27

28

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM MELVIN WHITE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GOLDEN STATE EYE CENTER,

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-06645-AWI-GSA-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 14)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Plaintiff, William Melvin White (“plaintiff”), is a state

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On July 23, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the Findings

and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days. On

August 27, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion to extend time. On

September 14, 2007, the court granted plaintiff thirty (30) days

within which to respond. On September 18, 2007, plaintiff filed

Case 1:04-cv-06645-JMR Document 20 Filed 12/20/07 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

27

28

2

objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis. However, in

the objections, Plaintiff asks for leave to file an amended

complaint. The objections contain additional allegations that

may state a claim against some of the Defendants the Magistrate

Judge recommends dismissing. Thus, while the court agrees

dismissal may be warranted, the dismissal will be with leave to

amend. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed July 23, 2007,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Pursuant to Plaintiff’s request, the complaint is

DISMISSED with leave to amend;

4. Any amended complaint SHALL BE FILED within thirty days

of this order’s date of service.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06645-JMR Document 20 Filed 12/20/07 Page 2 of 2