Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01677/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01677-5/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL KLEIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. MONTOYA, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:13-cv-01677-LJO-SKO (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, AND 

MOTION TO STRIKE 

(Docs. 24, 27, 35, and 42)

Plaintiff Michael Klein (“Plaintiff”), a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 17, 2013. This 

action for damages is proceeding against Defendants Montoya and Galvez (“Defendants”) for 

violating Plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution with 

respect to a clothed body search that allegedly involved sexual abuse. 

This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 28, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 

Recommendations recommending that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment raising the 

affirmative defense of exhaustion be denied, Plaintiff’s Motion for an Extension of Time be 

denied as moot, and Defendants’ Motion to Strike be denied as moot. The parties did not file 

Objections. Local Rule 304(b). 

///

///

Case 1:13-cv-01677-LJO-BMK Document 43 Filed 11/17/15 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

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, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on October 28, 2015, is adopted in full; 

2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on May 19, 2015, is DENIED;

3. Plaintiff’s Motion for an Extension of Time, filed on July 9, 2015, is DENIED as 

moot; and

4. Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s surreply, filed on July 28, 2015, is 

DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 17, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01677-LJO-BMK Document 43 Filed 11/17/15 Page 2 of 2