Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00454/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00454-6/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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UMAR SHAHID, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

I. ALDAZ et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-0454 JAM KJN P (TEMP) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 

under 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 November 12, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Defendants have filed 

objections to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff has filed a reply. 

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

analysis. 

///// 

Case 2:14-cv-00454-JAM-KJN Document 40 Filed 12/29/15 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

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 12, 2015 are adopted in full; 

 2. The motion for summary judgment filed on behalf of defendants Rodriguez and 

Thompson is granted in part and denied in part as follow: 

a. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on plaintiff’s failure to 

exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit as required (Doc. No. 96) is denied 

with respect to plaintiff’s right-to-marry claim against defendant Rodriguez; 

b. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on plaintiff’s failure to 

exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit as required (Doc. No. 96) is granted 

with respect to plaintiff’s retaliation claim against defendant Thompson; and 

 3. Defendant Thompson is dismissed from this action without prejudice. 

DATED: December 28, 2015 

 /s/ John A. Mendez______________ _______ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 2:14-cv-00454-JAM-KJN Document 40 Filed 12/29/15 Page 2 of 2