Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00843/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00843-6/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAMEN D. RABB,

Plaintiff,

v.

ESTEVEN FIGUEROA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:23-cv-0843 JLT SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDTIONS DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

(Docs. 30, 31)

Isaiah J. Petillo seeks to hold the defendants, both correctional officers at Kern Valley 

State Prison, liable for violations of his civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

(See generally Doc. 1.) Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment relating to exhaustion of 

the administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. (Doc. 30.) The magistrate 

judge recommended that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied, after finding that 

Plaintiff “is not required to plead and/or prove exhaustion of the administrative remedies because 

it is an affirmative defense.” (Doc. 31 at 1-2.) 

The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that 

any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 31 at 3.) The Court advised Plaintiff the “failure to 

file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing 

Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections and 

the time to do so has passed. 

Case 1:23-cv-00843-JLT-SAB Document 37 Filed 03/19/24 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

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 

case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 

Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on February 20, 2024 (Doc. 31) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 30) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 19, 2024 

Case 1:23-cv-00843-JLT-SAB Document 37 Filed 03/19/24 Page 2 of 2