Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01842/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01842-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK RONALD HOLLEY, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1842 FCD JFM P

vs.

C.C.I. W. SINKOVICH, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

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 General Order No. 262.

On October 12, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. On October

28, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion for voluntary dismissal or, in the alternative, a statement of non-

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01842-FCD-JFM Document 23 Filed 11/22/05 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

1

 Plaintiff seeks dismissal of this action without prejudice in order to exhaust available

administrative remedies, and he specifically requests adoption of the findings and

recommendations in the alternative if granting his motion for voluntary dismissal will prejudice

his claims. Since plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing this action, the

action must be dismissed without prejudice. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1200-01

(9th Cir. 2002). The dismissal of this action without prejudice operates as a determination that

plaintiff’s claims have not been resolved on the merits herein. Nothing in this order should be

construed as a finding concerning the timeliness of plaintiff’s claims should he return to federal

court after exhausting said remedies.

2

opposition to the findings and recommendations.1 Plaintiff seeks dismissal of this action without

prejudice in order to exhaust available administrative remedies.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, 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 October 12, 2005, are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ April 11, 2005 motion to dismiss is granted; and

3. This action is dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to

suit. 

DATED:November 22, 2005

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01842-FCD-JFM Document 23 Filed 11/22/05 Page 2 of 2