Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05955/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05955-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

STEVEN MARKS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ANDREWS,

Defendant. 

 /

1:04-cv-05955-REC-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 10),

DISMISSING ACTION, AND

DIRECTING CLERK TO ENTER

JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT

Plaintiff, Steven Marks (“plaintiff”), is a federal prisoner

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal

Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 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 March 15, 2006, 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 fifteen (15) days. 

To date, plaintiff has not filed objections to the Magistrate

Case 1:04-cv-05955-REC -SMS Document 12 Filed 04/18/06 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

 The United States Postal Service returned the order served on plaintiff on April 4, 2006, as undeliverable. 

1

A notation on the envelope indicated: Return to Sender - Not at this address. However, plaintiff has not notified the

court of any change in his address. Absent such notice, service at a party’s prior address is fully effective. See Local

Rule 83-182(f). 

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 March 15, 2006,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action is DISMISSED based on plaintiff’s failure

to obey the court’s order of February 1, 2006, and for failing to

state a claim upon which relief can be granted;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment

for defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2006 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05955-REC -SMS Document 12 Filed 04/18/06 Page 2 of 2