Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00507/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00507-2/pdf.json

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

---

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

GARY R. THOMAS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0507 FCD GGH P

vs.

WARDEN KRAMER, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. On May 17, 2006, the court issued

an order finding that plaintiff’s complaint stated a colorable claim for relief as to defendants

Neves, Tourrella, Stalks, Gangi, Holloway, Stevenson and Brozdoonoff. The court dismissed the

claims against defendants California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and

Kramer with leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Thirty days passed and

plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. 

Accordingly, the court will separately order service of defendants Neves,

Tourrella, Stalks, Gangi, Holloway, Stevenson and Brozdoonoff. For the reasons stated in the

May 17, 2006, order, the court recommends that the claims against CDCR and Kramer be

dismissed.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00507-FCD-GGH Document 8 Filed 08/07/06 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

2

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the claims against defendants CDCR and

Kramer contained in the complaint be dismissed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 8/7/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

tho507.56

Case 2:06-cv-00507-FCD-GGH Document 8 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 2