Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00865/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00865-13/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

ANTHONY D. WAFER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

W. SUESBERRY, et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:07-cv-00865-AWI-BAM (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS 

FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST 

ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

(ECF No. 60)

Plaintiff Anthony D. Wafer (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 15, 2014, the 

Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendants’ motion to dismiss for 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the 

Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Hasadsri be dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and that this action proceed on 

Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Reynolds and Suesberry for failure to provide medication 

in violation of the Eighth Amendment.1 

The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties appearing in this action 

and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days after service. 

More than thirty days have passed and no objections have been filed. On February 24, 2014, 

 

1 The Clerk of the Court entered default against Defendant Suesberry on November 21, 2013. Plaintiff filed 

a motion for default judgment against Defendant Suesberry on January 9, 2014. (ECF No. 59.) The motion for 

default judgment remains pending. 

Case 1:07-cv-00865-AWI-BAM Document 62 Filed 03/14/14 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

Plaintiff filed a statement indicating that he concurred with the Findings and Recommendations 

and would not be filing any objections. (ECF No. 61.) 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, issued on January 15, 2014, are adopted in 

full; and 

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is 

GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART;

3. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Hasadsri is DISMISSED without prejudice 

for failure to exhaust administrative remedies;

4. This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Reynolds and 

Suesberry for failure to provide medication in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and

5. This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings 

consistent with this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00865-AWI-BAM Document 62 Filed 03/14/14 Page 2 of 2