Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00324/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00324-12/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

27

28

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAGI MUKATIN, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

R. HESSELTINE, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

1:05-cv-00324-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

GRANTING IN PARTY AND DENYING

IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS (Docs.

44 and 49)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS

LEAVE TO FILE MOTION TO DISMISS

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff Sagi Mukatin (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

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 Rule 72-302.

On August 23, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was

served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings and

Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. 

To date, the parties have not filed formal objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations. However, on August 29, 2006, Plaintiff filed a request for the court the grant

a nunc pro tunc order in the interests of judicial economy. Because this document addresses the

motion to dismiss and the Findings and Recommendations, the court construes this document as

objections.

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

Case 1:05-cv-00324-AWI -SMS Document 51 Filed 12/13/06 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 the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

In his August 29, 2006 filing, Plaintiff requests the court allow this action to proceed. 

Plaintiff states that he has now exhausted all claims in this action. Plaintiff states that if the court

dismisses claims for failure to exhaust, it will be a waste of judicial resources because Plaintiff will

simply file a new complaint, the court will have to screen the new complaint, and the Marshal will

have to serve each Defendant again. Plaintiff asks that the court avoid this additional burden by

simply deeming this action filed on the date Plaintiff’s administrative appeal was exhausted. While

Plaintiff’s request may have practical implications and could arguably save the parties and the court

additional work in the future, there are simply no grounds for the court to grant this request. The

court has no choice but to dismiss claims if the prisoner did not complete all administrative remedies

before filing suit even if exhaustion is completed after suit was filed. McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d

1198, 1199 (9 Cir. 2002). th

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 23, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s mail and access to the courts claims against

defendants Hesseltine, Harris, Redding, Corley, Deathriage, and Fisher for failure to exhaust prior

to filing suit is GRANTED, and the claims are DISMISSED, without prejudice;

3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against defendants

Clark, Del Vecchio, and Torres for failure to exhaust is DENIED; 

4. Plaintiff’s August 29, 2006 request is DENIED; and

5. Defendants are GRANTED leave to file another unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion

addressing plaintiff’s excessive force claim within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this

order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00324-AWI -SMS Document 51 Filed 12/13/06 Page 2 of 2