Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01566/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01566-3/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

LEO LERMA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

D. D. ORTIZ,

Defendant. 

 /

1:06-cv-01566-LJO-NEW (DLB) PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

DISMISSING ACTION, WITH

PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO OBEY

A COURT ORDER AND FAILURE TO

STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH

RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED

(Docs. 1, 11, and 12)

ORDER THAT THIS DISMISSAL

SHALL COUNT AS A STRIKE

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §

1915(G)

Plaintiff Leo Lerma (“plaintiff”), a former 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 June 13, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

Recommendations herein which was served on plaintiff and which

Case 1:06-cv-01566-LJO -LJO Document 13 Filed 07/13/07 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

27

28

2

contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings

and Recommendations was to be filed within twenty days. To date,

plaintiff has not filed any objection to the Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.

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 13, 2007,

is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. This action is DISMISSED, with prejudice, for

plaintiff’s failure to obey the court’s order of April 12, 2007,

and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted; and

3. This dismissal shall count as a strike pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 13, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01566-LJO -LJO Document 13 Filed 07/13/07 Page 2 of 2