Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00235/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00235-3/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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANCISCO SOTO,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11-CV-235-LAB (JMA)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

vs. AND RECOMMENDATION

R. GINES, RN, et al.,

Defendants.

Soto initiated this action on February 3, 2011, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b) and Civil Local Rules 72.1(c) and (d) it was referred to Magistrate Judge Jan

Adler for a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Now pending before the Court is

Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Judge Adler issued his R&R on the motion on January

30, 2012. Objections were due on February 21, 2012, and the Court has not received

any. The Court therefore ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s

disposition that has been properly objected to.”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328

F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (district judge “must review the magistrate

judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not

otherwise”). 

First, Defendants’ motion to dismiss Soto’s complaint for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies is DENIED. The Court agrees with the R&R’s conclusion that

Case 3:11-cv-00235-LAB-JMA Document 34 Filed 02/27/12 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 -

“Defendants have not conclusively established that Plaintiff cannot be excused from

his obligation to exhaust administrative remedies.” (R&R at 7.) Second, Defendants’

motion to dismiss Soto’s negligence claim is DENIED AS MOOT; that claim is not

included in Soto’s First Amended Complaint. Third, Defendant Stout is DISMISSED

from this case. Fourth, Soto must show cause, within three weeks of the date this

Order is entered, why Defendant White should not be dismissed for failure to serve

him in a timely manner. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 23, 2012

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00235-LAB-JMA Document 34 Filed 02/27/12 Page 2 of 2