Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06351/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06351-1/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

27

28

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIE FRED BRADY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WARDEN CANDELARIA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:03-cv-06351-REC-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 12)

ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION

Plaintiff, Willie Fred Brady (“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.

On May 12, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. On June 23, 2005, plaintiff was reserved with the Findings

and Recommendations. To date, the parties have not filed

Case 1:03-cv-06351-REC -SMS Document 15 Filed 08/03/05 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

27

28

 The United States Postal Service returned the order served on plaintiff on May 20, 2005, as undeliverable. 

1

A notation on the envelope indicated: Return to Sender - CDC Number Does Not Match. However, plaintiff has not

notified the court of any change in his address (and/or CDC number). Absent such notice, service at a party’s prior

address (and/or CDC number) is fully effective. See Local Rule 83-182(f). 

2

objections thereto.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 May 12, 2005,

are ADOPTED in full; and

2. This action is DISMISSED in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 3, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06351-REC -SMS Document 15 Filed 08/03/05 Page 2 of 2