Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06413/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06413-1/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

 The United States Postal Service returned the order served on plaintiff on May 6, 2005, as undeliverable. 

A notation on the envelope indicated: Return to Sender - Not at CA Correction Institution. 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). 

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MELVIN FORD,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DR. J. NEUBARTH, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-06413-OWW-DLB-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 10)

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED

COMPLAINT (Doc. 9)

Plaintiff, Melvin Ford (“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 April 29, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. To date, the parties have not filed objections thereto.1

Case 1:04-cv-06413-OWW -DLB Document 12 Filed 06/30/05 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

2

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 April 29, 2005,

are ADOPTED in full; and,

2. Plaintiff’s amended complaint, filed January 13, 2005,

is DISMISSED without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06413-OWW -DLB Document 12 Filed 06/30/05 Page 2 of 2