Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01333/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01333-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTIN BONILLA RAMIREZ,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1333 FCD GGH P

vs.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks relief

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 9, 2006, this court dismissed plaintiff’s claims against

defendant Woodford as well as plaintiff’s injunctive relief claims against the remaining

defendants, granting plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days; plaintiff was

informed that failure to file an amended complaint would result in a recommendation of

dismissal of defendant Woodford from this action. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. 

By concurrently filed order, the court has found appropriate service of plaintiff’s

original complaint upon some defendants. The court will now recommend, for the reasons set

forth in the Order, filed on January 9, 2006, dismissal of defendant Woodford as well as

plaintiff’s injunctive relief claims. 

\\\\\

Case 2:05-cv-01333-FCD-GGH Document 13 Filed 03/16/06 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

Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that defendant Woodford, as well as

plaintiff’s injunctive relief claims with respect to all defendants, be dismissed from this action.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that

failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 3/15/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

____________________________________

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

rami1333.fr

Case 2:05-cv-01333-FCD-GGH Document 13 Filed 03/16/06 Page 2 of 2