Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00338/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00338-4/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIO LOPEZ-VALLE,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

CALIF. CITY CORR. FAC.,

 Defendant.

1:13-cv-00338-AWI-GSA-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. 13.)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITH 

PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY 

BE GRANTED UNDER SECTION 1983

ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT 

TO 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g)

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Antonio Lopez-Valle (APlaintiff@) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 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 302.

On April 24, 2015, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 

this action be dismissed based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 

granted under §1983. (Doc. 13.) Plaintiff was permitted twenty days in which to file 

Case 1:13-cv-00338-AWI-GSA Document 14 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 2
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

objections to the findings and recommendations. The twenty-day time period has expired, and 

Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations.1

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

analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 24, 

2015, are adopted in full;

2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a 

claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983;

3. This dismissal is subject to the Athree-strikes@ provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. '

1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011); and

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

 

1 The United States Postal Service returned the order on May 12, 2015 as undeliverable. A notation on 

the envelope indicates “undeliverable, RTS.” However, Plaintiff has not notified the court of any change in his 

address. Absent such notice, service at a party=s prior address is fully effective. Local Rule 182(f). 

Case 1:13-cv-00338-AWI-GSA Document 14 Filed 06/24/15 Page 2 of 2