Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00729/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00729-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KELVIN ALLEN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MEYER, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:09cv00729 LJO DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 

JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

(Document 81)

Plaintiff Kelvin Allen (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is represented by 

counsel for the limited purpose of resolving the issue of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

On November 25, 2014, Defendants filed the instant motion for judgment on the 

pleadings based on Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his claim as to Defendants Botello and Zuniga. 

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On April 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that 

Defendants’ motion be denied. The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties 

and contained notice that any objections must be filed within thirty days. The parties did not file 

objections.

Case 1:09-cv-00729-DAD-SKO Document 82 Filed 05/29/15 Page 1 of 2
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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), 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 April 22, 2015, are adopted in full; and 

2. Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings (Document 66) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 29, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00729-DAD-SKO Document 82 Filed 05/29/15 Page 2 of 2