Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05977/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05977-10/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

JOHN ANTHONY GAVINO,

Plaintiff,

vs.

HORFAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:03-cv-05977-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 40)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT/

ACTION

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

DISMISS AS MOOT (Doc. 35)

John Anthony Gavino (“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 January 5, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which

contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the Findings

and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty (20) days. To

date, Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

//

Case 1:03-cv-05977-OWW -LJO Document 41 Filed 02/26/07 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

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 January 5,

2007, are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. The Complaint, and therefore this action, is DISMISSED

pursuant to Local Rule 11-110, and for Plaintiff’s failure to

obey the Court’s order of December 4, 2006; and,

3. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed October 30, 2006,

is DENIED as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 25, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05977-OWW -LJO Document 41 Filed 02/26/07 Page 2 of 2