Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01697/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01697-10/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONICO J. QUIROGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

THEODORE KING,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS 

CASE WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE 

TO STATE A CLAIM

(ECF No. 36)

DISMISSAL COUNTs AS STRIKE 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)

CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant 

to 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.

Plaintiff initiated this action on November 9, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) On December 14, 

2016, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case screened Plaintiff’s third amended 

complaint and, finding that it did not state any cognizable claims, recommended the case 

be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 36.) On December 27, 

Case 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-HBK Document 38 Filed 02/08/17 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

2016, Plaintiff filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s findings. (ECF No. 37.) 

Plaintiff’s one-page objection argues, without explaining why, that Plaintiff should be 

allowed to amend to cure the identified deficiencies in his Due Process claims. (Id.)

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 

the 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. Plaintiff’s objection has been considered and found to 

lack merit. Plaintiff was granted three opportunities to attempt to amend his claims to 

make them cognizable and each time he failed to adhere to the applicable pleading 

standards. Given this history and the objections, there is no reasonable basis to 

conclude that Plaintiff can plead a cognizable claim. See Telesaurus VPC, LLC v. Power, 

623 F.3d 998, 1003 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that leave to amend need not be granted when the 

plaintiff has be given repeated opportunities to correct deficiencies). 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court adopts the findings and recommendations filed on December 14

2016 (ECF No. 36) in full;

2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim;

3. Dismissal counts as a STRIKE pursuant to the “three-strikes” provision of 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions and close 

this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 8, 2017 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01697-AWI-HBK Document 38 Filed 02/08/17 Page 2 of 2