Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00875/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00875-4/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GALA SIMONE LUI, 1:06-cv-00875-AWI-SMS-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

vs. (Doc. 7.)

HENRY, et al., ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

Defendants. ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO CLOSE CASE 

_____________________________/

Gala Simone Lui (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 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. 

Plaintiff filed the complaint initiating this action on July 10, 2006. On June 2, 2008,

the court screened plaintiff's complaint and issued findings and a recommendation that this action be

dismissed with prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to state any cognizable claims. Plaintiff was

provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within thirty days. 

Plaintiff requested, and was granted, a forty-five day extension of time to file objections. More than

forty-five days have passed, and plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the

findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73-

305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

Case 1:06-cv-00875-AWI -SMS Document 10 Filed 09/08/08 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

file, the court will adopt the findings and recommendations. In this action, plaintiff challenges a

disciplinary hearing finding. However, “a state prisoner’s § 1983 action is barred (absent prior

invalidation) - no matter the relief sought (damages or equitable relief), no matter the target of the

prisoner’s suit (state conduct leading to conviction or internal prison proceedings) - if success in that

action would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of confinement or its duration.” Wilkinson v.

Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81-2 (2005). Where, as here, success in this action would implicitly question

the validity of the disciplinary hearing’s finding that revoked plaintiff’s good time credits, plaintiff

must first achieve a favorable termination of his available state or federal habeas. See Edwards v.

Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648 (1997). Because the punishment imposed at the disciplinary hearing

affects the duration of plaintiff’s sentence, plaintiff’s due process claim is barred until such time as

plaintiff invalidates the result of the disciplinary hearing.

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on June

2, 2008, are adopted;

2. This action is dismissed with prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted under §1983; and

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 6, 2008 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00875-AWI -SMS Document 10 Filed 09/08/08 Page 2 of 2