Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01238/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01238-5/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

CHARLES ARTHUR HINSHAW,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1238 FCD GGH P

vs.

JOHN B. HARDCASTLE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this action pursuant to

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 402 U.S. 388 (1971).

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 October 3, 2007, 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. Plaintiff has not filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

On October 31, 2007, the court granted plaintiff an extension of time to file

objections to the findings and recommendations. On December 17, 2007, the court granted

plaintiff a second request for extension of time to file objections. On January 10, 2008, plaintiff

Case 2:07-cv-01238-FCD-GGH Document 27 Filed 04/09/08 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

filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. On January 29, 2008, the court denied

this motion and granted plaintiff twenty days to file objections. 

On March 10, 2008, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. This complaint does

not cure the pleading defects discussed by the magistrate judge in the October 3, 2007, findings

and recommendations.

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 October 3, 2007, are adopted in full;

and

2. This action is dismissed.

DATED: April 8, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01238-FCD-GGH Document 27 Filed 04/09/08 Page 2 of 2