Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05117/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05117-3/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

TERRY PARKER,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MATTHEW C. KRAMER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:02-cv-05117-AWI-DLB-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 84)

ORDER GRANTING UNENUMERATED

RULE 12(b) MOTION (Doc. 59)

ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS THREE

AND FIVE

Plaintiff, Terry Parker (“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 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 to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

//

Case 1:02-cv-05117-AWI-DLB Document 90 Filed 07/22/05 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;

2. Defendant’s unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion, filed

October 18, 2004, is GRANTED;

3. Claims Three and Five are DISMISSED, without prejudice,

for failure to exhaust; and

4. The pending motion for summary judgment is REFERRED to

the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 15, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05117-AWI-DLB Document 90 Filed 07/22/05 Page 2 of 2