Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01049/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01049-13/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEITH BRIDGEWATER,

aka ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD,

Plaintiff, CV F 06 1049 LJO WMW PC

vs. FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION

 A. K. SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

This action proceeds on the August 10, 2006, complaint. Plaintiff, an inmate in the

custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at CSP Sacramento,

brings this civil rights action against defendant correctional officials employed by the CDCR at

CSP Corcoran.

Plaintiff’s claim in this complaint is that Defendants prevented him from the free exercies

of his religious beliefs in violation of the First Amendment. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that he

was prevented from attending a holy festival to commemorate on of the five holy pillars of Islam.

On February 6, 2008, an order was entered, granting Plaintiff leave to file an amended

complaint. In that order, Plaintiff was advised that he stated a claim for relief as to Defendants

Case 1:06-cv-01049-LJO -WMW Document 47 Filed 03/11/08 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

2

Hill and Niermier. Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff was

advised that if he failed to do so, this action would proceed against Defendants Hill and

Neiermier, and the remaining Defendants would be dismissed. On February 27, 2008, Plaintiff

filed notice that he intends to proceed on the original complaint.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendants Scribner, Pena and

Sullivan be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s

findings of fact. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9 Cir. 1998). Failure to file th

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9 Cir. 1991). th

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2008 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01049-LJO -WMW Document 47 Filed 03/11/08 Page 2 of 2