Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01206/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01206-3/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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

William Jackson Kitchens,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-1206 MCE PAN P

vs. Findings and Recommendations

Pat Houge, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff moves voluntarily to dismiss his claims against

defendant Jeff Diggs. Defendant filed no opposition. 

Since defendant Diggs served an answer, plaintiff cannot

voluntarily dismiss without an order of the court without filing

a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have

appeared in the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1). But an action

may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s instance upon order of the 

court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems 

proper. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).

The complaint alleges defendant Diggs violated plaintiff’s 

Case 2:04-cv-01206-MCE -EFB Document 34 Filed 01/06/06 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

right to due process by basing his determination plaintiff was a

sexually violent predator solely on papers submitted to him by a

different defendant. Plaintiff now asserts that upon review, he

believes these allegations “were in fact inconsequential,” and

that defendant Diggs is not the person who performed the required

review.

Since defendant Diggs filed no opposition, plaintiff’s

October 27, 2005, motion should be granted and claims against

defendant Diggs are dismissed with prejudice.

Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), these

findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case. Written objections may be

filed within 20 days of service of these findings and

recommendations. The document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district

judge may accept, reject, or modify these findings and

recommendations in whole or in part.

Dated: January 5, 2006. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01206-MCE -EFB Document 34 Filed 01/06/06 Page 2 of 2