Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00628/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00628-9/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN LEWIS, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALAN QUINTO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00628-KES-CDB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS (1) TO DENY 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT AND (2) TO DISMISS 

DEFENDANT HERNANDEZ 

(Docs. 33, 39, 43)

Plaintiff Kevin Lewis, Jr. is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On February 12, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations, recommending plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 33) be denied

without prejudice. Doc. 39. The magistrate judge reasoned that plaintiff’s motion was 

premature because discovery had not yet commenced and that the motion failed to include a 

statement of undisputed facts as required by Local Rule 260(a). Id. at 4-5.

Thereafter, on February 29, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations to dismiss defendant John Hernandez without prejudice. Doc. 43. The

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations followed plaintiff’s failure to respond to an 

order to show cause as to why defendant Hernandez should not be dismissed for plaintiff’s 

Case 1:22-cv-00628-CDB Document 54 Filed 07/31/24 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

failure to provide sufficient information to effect service of process on defendant Hernandez. 

Doc. 37.

Any objections by plaintiff to the findings and recommendations were due within 14 days

of the date of service of the findings and recommendations (i.e., no later than February 29, 2024, 

and March 18, 2024, with allowance for three additional days for transmittal by mail pursuant to 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), respectively). Docs. 39, 43. No objections were filed and the time to do so 

has expired.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this court has conducted a de novo review of 

this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court concludes the findings and 

recommendations (Docs. 39, 43) are supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued February 12, 2024 (Doc. 39) and February 

29, 2024 (Doc. 43), are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 33) is DENIED without prejudice, as 

premature; and

3. Defendant John Hernandez is DISMISSED without prejudice from this action for 

plaintiff’s failure to effectuate service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 31, 2024 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-00628-CDB Document 54 Filed 07/31/24 Page 2 of 2