Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01417/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01417-10/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

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

ROGER WILKERSON,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

JEFFREY BEARD, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:14-cv-01417-LJO-EPG-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF No. 53.)

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

Roger Wilkerson (Aplaintiff@) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. 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 November 16, 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. Plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file objections to the 

findings and recommendations. The thirty-day deadline has passed, and no objections have 

been filed.1

 

1

On December 2, 2015, the U.S. Postmaster returned the Court’s order to the Court as undeliverable, with the 

notation “Attempted – Not Known – Unable to Forward.” (Court Record.) 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 1:14-cv-01417-LJO-EPG Document 54 Filed 01/04/16 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

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, 

including plaintiff’s objections, 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 

November 16, 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: January 4, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01417-LJO-EPG Document 54 Filed 01/04/16 Page 2 of 2