Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05319/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05319-2/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

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD G. FARRIES, SR.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05319-REC-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 11)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF

JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS 

Plaintiff, Richard G. Farries, Sr. (“plaintiff”), is a state

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

rights action 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 72-302.

On June 28, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that the action be dismissed for Plaintiff’s

failure to file an Amended Complaint. The Findings and

Recommendations herein were served on plaintiff and contained

notice to plaintiff that any objections to the Findings and

Recommendations were to be filed within twenty (20) days. To

Case 1:04-cv-05319-REC -SMS Document 13 Filed 09/08/05 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

27

28

 The United States Postal Service returned the order served on plaintiff on July 11, 2005, as undeliverable. 1

However, plaintiff has not notified the court of any change in his address. Absent such notice, service at a party’s

prior address is fully effective. See Local Rule 83-182(f). 

2

date, plaintiff has not filed objections thereto.1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 28, 2005,

are ADOPTED in full; and,

2. The complaint, and therefore this action, is DISMISSED

pursuant to Local Rule 11-110, and based on plaintiff’s failure

to obey the court’s order of May 12, 2005, and for plaintiff’s

failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 7, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05319-REC -SMS Document 13 Filed 09/08/05 Page 2 of 2