Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01243/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01243-4/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CURTIS MILLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. CATES, FAYE MONTEGRANDE, 

OLUFEMI OWOLABI, U. BANIGA,

Defendants.

No. 1:20-cv-01243-ADA-HBK (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL 

DISMISSAL

(ECF No. 30)

Plaintiff Curtis Miller, a former state prisoner appearing pro se, initiated this action by 

filing a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) This matter was assigned to a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

On November 3, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 23.) Defendants sought partial dismissal of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint. (Id.) Specifically, the motion seeks dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint against 

Defendants Cates and Baniga. (Id.) Plaintiff failed to timely file an opposition to the motion and 

on January 19, 2023, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opposition within fourteen days of 

service. (ECF No. 24.) Therein, the Court notified Plaintiff that “[a]bsent any opposition by 

Plaintiff, the motion shall be deemed unopposed.” (Id. at 2.) To date, Plaintiff has not filed an 

opposition and the time to do has expired. 

On August 31, 2023, the assigned Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 

Case 1:20-cv-01243-KES-HBK Document 31 Filed 10/25/23 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

27

28

2

recommending the Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismiss Defendants Cates and 

Baniga from this case without further leave to amend. (ECF No. 30.) The findings and 

recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections thereto were to be 

filed within fourteen days of service. (Id. at 7.) Plaintiff failed to file any objections and the time 

to do so has expired. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 by proper analysis.

Accordingly, 

1. The findings and recommendation filed on August 31, 2023, (ECF No. 30), are 

ADOPTED in FULL; 

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 23), is GRANTED; 

3. Defendants Cates and Baniga are DISMISSED from this case;

4. Defendants Drs. Montegrande and Owolabi are ordered to file their answer to the 

Complaint within fourteen days from the date of this Order; and 

5. The Clerk of Court shall terminate Defendants Cates and Baniga.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 25, 2023 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-01243-KES-HBK Document 31 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 2