Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02439/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02439-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY RAY EVANS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

A. MALFI, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:06-cv-02439-JKS-DAD

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On December 28, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations,

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has filed

objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304,

this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

file, with particular attention to those portions relevant or pertinent to the objections raised, the

Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

analysis.

In his objections, which principally consists of a re-submission of his complaint, Plaintiff

has failed to address the Findings and Recommendations in any meaningful manner. Under the

Prison Litigation Reform Act, a prisoner must exhaust administrative remedies available to him

prior to bringing his action. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, ____, 126

S.Ct. 2378, 2387–90 (2006). Plaintiff’s own admission that although he initiated an internal

grievance it has not been acted upon establishes he has not exhausted the administrative

Case 2:06-cv-02439-JKS-DAD Document 13 Filed 03/07/08 Page 1 of 2
ORDER

Evans v. Malfi, 2:06-cv-02439-JKS-DAD 2

remedies available to him. Nor, has he shown cause to excuse exhaustion. Moreover, even if

Plaintiff were to exhaust his administrative remedies during the pendency of the case, the Court

must dismiss the complaint without prejudice. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 

1199–1200 (9th Cir. 2002).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 6, 2006, are adopted in full; 

2. The complaint is DISMISSED, without prejudice; and

3. The Clerk of the Court to enter final judgment accordingly.

Dated: March 7, 2008.

s/ James K. Singleton, Jr.

JAMES K. SINGLETON, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-02439-JKS-DAD Document 13 Filed 03/07/08 Page 2 of 2