Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01547/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01547-12/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

 On December 11, 2006, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file 1

objections to the findings and recommendations. On December 14, 2006, plaintiff filed

objections. Good cause appearing, the December 11, 2006 request will be granted and the

Decemer 14, 2006 objections deemed timely filed.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLARENCE A. GIBSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-1547 LKK JFM P

vs.

D. L. RUNNELS, Warden, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a 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 November 14, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations, as well as several other motions.1

/////

Case 2:03-cv-01547-LKK -JFM Document 124 Filed 03/12/07 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. The magistrate judge recommends

dismissal of this action due to plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to suit. 

Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, the findings and recommendations

will adopted in full. In view of that ruling, all outstanding motions will be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 14, 2006, are adopted in

full;

2. Defendants’ April 8, 2005 motion to dismiss is granted;

3. Plaintiff’s December 11, 2006 request for an extension of time to file

objections is granted;

4. Plaintiff’s December 14, 2006 objections are deemed timely filed;

5. Plaintiff’s December 14, 2006 motion to stay is denied;

6. Plaintiff’s December 20, 2006 motion for appointment of counsel and

extraordinary extension of time is denied;

7. All other outstanding motions are denied; and

8. This action is dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to

suit. 

DATED: March 9, 2007.

Case 2:03-cv-01547-LKK -JFM Document 124 Filed 03/12/07 Page 2 of 2