Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00013/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00013-1/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

DONALD LEE IVANS, No. CIV-S-04-0013 MCD/DAD P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

GLENN TOPPENBERG, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a former 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 General

Order No. 262.

On August 4, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and

recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings

and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days.

///

Case 2:04-cv-00013-MCE -DAD Document 27 Filed 09/20/05 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

 Plaintiff filed a letter on August 25, 2005, indicating that he wished to proceed with this

1

action against defendant Croll. However, in a confusing statement, plaintiff adds, “Also, with

the respect of the court I would like to request ‘Objections to Magistrate Judge’s findings and

recommendations to this court case # CIV-S-04-0013 MCE DAD P.” (Letter, filed 8/25/05, at

1.) No other statement or clarification are made about this request. Therefore, the court will

infer that plaintiff does not object to the dismissal of defendant Neal.

2

Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and

recommendations.1

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and

recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that: 

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 4, 2005,

are adopted in full; and

2. The claims against defendant Neal are dismissed without

prejudice.

DATED: September 19, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00013-MCE -DAD Document 27 Filed 09/20/05 Page 2 of 2