Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01589/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01589-0/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

DERWIN HILLMON,

Plaintiff, 1: 09 CV 01589 OWW MJS (PC)

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

A. MADEIRA, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302 pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

By order filed March 16, 2010, the court dismissed the operative complaint for

failure to state a claim and directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. 

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

 The March 16, 2010, order informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies in his complaint. 

Because Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the court recommends dismissal of the

claims made in the original complaint with prejudice for failure to state a federal claim upon

which the court could grant relief. See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446, 1448 (9 Cir. 1987) th

(prisoner must be given notice of deficiencies and opportunity to amend prior to dismissing for

failure to state a claim).

Case 1:09-cv-01589-OWW -MJS Document 11 Filed 05/05/10 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for

failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

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)(B). Within

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

written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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 objections within the th

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

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2010 /s/ Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-01589-OWW -MJS Document 11 Filed 05/05/10 Page 2 of 2