Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01648/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01648-1/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN LOPEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

SMELOSKY, et al.

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 08cv1648

ORDER ADOPTING THE

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION,

OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S

OBJECTIONS AND GRANTING

PLAINTIFF SIXTY DAYS TO FILE

AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

On September 8, 2008, plaintiff filed a complaint for relief under 42 U.S.C §1983 based

on allegations that defendants knew another inmate planned to injure plaintiff but did not take

action to prevent plaintiff’s injury. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint

for failure to exhaust administrative remedies on January 23, 2009. Plaintiff did not file an

opposition. Magistrate Judge Cathy Bencivengo issued an report and recommendation

(“report”) recommending this Court grant defendant’s motion to dismiss based on plaintiff’s

failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiff filed an objection to the R&R which

objected to the magistrate judge’s determination that there are no facts in dispute in this matter

and requests “that the complaint be Granted to the court to resolve this dispute and give justice

to this matter, and/or grant an evidentiary hearing to view and decide on the disputed facts

(sic).” Doc. 23 at 2. In the alternative, plaintiff requests an emergency extension of time

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) to file an opposition to defendant’s motion

Case 3:08-cv-01648-JAH-CAB Document 27 Filed 09/22/09 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 08cv1648

to dismiss and leave to file an amended complaint. Id. at 6. Defendants’ reply states they do

not object to plaintiff’s request for an extension of time. 

This Court finds that the report provides a cogent analysis of the issues presented in the

plaintiff’s complaint and agrees with the findings of the Magistrate Judge’s report. Accordingly,

this Court OVERRULES plaintiff’s objections, ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report in its

entirety, and DISMISSES plaintiff’s complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may file an

amended complaint on or before November 17, 2009. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 22, 2009

JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-01648-JAH-CAB Document 27 Filed 09/22/09 Page 2 of 2