Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00563/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00563-3/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER HINES,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

C. GIPSON, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:14-cv-00563-AWI-EPG-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF No. 14.)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITH 

PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY 

BE GRANTED UNDER SECTION 1983

ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT 

TO 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g)

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Christopher Hines (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 302.

On February 11, 2016, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 

this action be dismissed based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 

granted under §1983. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff was granted thirty days to file objections to the 

findings and recommendations. The thirty-day time period has expired, and Plaintiff has not 

filed objections or otherwise responded to the Court’s order.

Case 1:14-cv-00563-AWI-EPG Document 15 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 2
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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, 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 proper 

analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February 

11, 2016, are adopted in full;

2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a 

claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983;

3. This dismissal is subject to the Athree-strikes@ provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. '

1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011); and

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 5, 2016 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00563-AWI-EPG Document 15 Filed 04/05/16 Page 2 of 2