Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01020/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01020-7/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

TOMMIE LEE BAKER,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. ALVA, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01020-AWI-MJS (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

TO GRANT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO 

DISMISS

(ECF No. 26)

FOURTEEN (14) DAY OBJECTION 

DEADLINE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against 

Defendants Alva, Mendoza, Franco, and O’Daniels on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 

failure to protect claim. (ECF Nos. 11 & 13.)

On March 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the action with prejudice on 

the ground he no longer has any dispute with Defendants requiring resolution by the 

Court. (ECF No. 26.) Defendants filed a statement of no opposition. (ECF No. 28.) 

Where a defendant has appeared in the action by filing an answer, Plaintiff may 

dismiss the action only by stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared or by 

court order on terms the Court deems proper. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). Here, Defendants 

have filed an answer. (ECF No. 19.) No signed stipulation for dismissal is before the 

Court. Nevertheless, there is no objection to dismissal of the action with prejudice. The 

Case 1:14-cv-01020-AWI-MJS Document 29 Filed 04/14/15 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

Court finds that dismissal with prejudice is proper. Accordingly, it is HEREBY 

RECOMMENDED that the action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2).

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)(1). Within 

fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any 

party 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.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen 

(14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 

Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 

F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 13, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01020-AWI-MJS Document 29 Filed 04/14/15 Page 2 of 2