Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06288/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06288-13/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

FRANCOIS P. GIVENS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DERRAL G. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-06288-AWI-DLB-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 99)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Plaintiff, Francois P. Givens (“plaintiff”), a state

prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 14, 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

Case 1:04-cv-06288-AWI-DLB Document 114 Filed 12/20/07 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

 It appears Plaintiff has appealed an earlier order of the court dismissing the complaint with leave to 1

amend. The filing of a notice of appeal generally divests a district court of jurisdiction to determine the “substantial

rights” at issue in that action during the pendency of the appeal. Pyrodyne Corp. v. Pyrotronics Corp., 847 F. 2d

1398, 1403 (9 Cir. 1988). An exception to this rule exists where a deficiency in the notice of appeal “is clear to the th

district court.” Ruby v. Secretary of the United States Navy, 365 F. 2d 385, 389 (9 Cir. 1966). In such a case the th

district court may proceed with the case “knowing that it has not been deprived of jurisdiction.” Id. Because no

appeal lies from an order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend, this court has not been deprived of

jurisdiction. 

To the extent Plaintiff previously appealed the court’s denial of an injunction, it appears this appeal has

been dismissed.

2

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.1

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 August 14,

2007, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and,

2. This action is DISMISSED for plaintiff’s failure to

obey the court’s order of June 4, 2007, and for failure

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06288-AWI-DLB Document 114 Filed 12/20/07 Page 2 of 2