Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01108/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01108-4/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

MICHAEL BENANTI,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. DOERER, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-01108 JLT CDB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 

ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND 

DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 

CLOSE THIS CASE

(Doc. 15)

Michael Benanti is a federal prisoner and seeks to hold the defendants liable for violations 

of his civil rights, based upon the conditions of lockdown that occurred at the United States 

Penitentiary- Atwater from August 9 to October 9, 2024. (See generally Doc. 10.) The 

magistrate judge ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the matter should not be dismissed for 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Doc. 13), and Plaintiff failed to respond to the order. 

The magistrate judge found it was “clear on the face of the complaint that Plaintiff has 

failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit as required under the Prison 

Litigation Reform Act.” (Doc. 15 at 2.) Although Plaintiff asserted that he was unable to access 

grievance forms, the magistrate judge found “no allegations to suggest this was anything other 

than a temporary unavailability.” (Id. at 3.) In addition, Plaintiff did not allege “any efforts by 

him to exhaust administrative remedies after the lockdown ended where thwarted.” (Id., 

emphasis omitted.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the Court dismiss “this action 

Case 1:24-cv-01108-JLT-CDB Document 16 Filed 01/13/25 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

without prejudice to Plaintiff’s re-filing once his claims are exhausted.” (Id. at 4.)

The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that 

any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 15 at 5.) The Court advised him that the “failure 

to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., 

citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file 

objections, and the time to do so has passed. 

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 

Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 

are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations dated December 20, 2024 (Doc. 15) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to 

exhaust his administrative remedies.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate pending matters and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2025 

Case 1:24-cv-01108-JLT-CDB Document 16 Filed 01/13/25 Page 2 of 2