Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06383/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06383-2/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

THURMAN DEE PAYNE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCHULTZ, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-06383-OWW-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 11)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Plaintiff, Thurman Dee Payne (“plaintiff”), is a federal

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of

Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 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 March 9, 2006, the Court issued an Order dismissing the

Complaint with leave to amend for failure to state a claim on

which relief could be granted. 

On April 19, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the Findings

Case 1:04-cv-06383-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 06/02/06 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

and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty (20) days. To

date, plaintiff has not filed objections to the Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

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 April 19, 2006,

are ADOPTED IN FULL; and,

2. This action is DISMISSED based on plaintiff’s failure

to obey the court’s order of March 9, 2006, pursuant to Local

Rule 11-110 and for failure to state a claim on which relief can

be granted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 1, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06383-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 06/02/06 Page 2 of 2