Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01402/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01402-10/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

Plaintiff Alvaro Quezada is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On February 6, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations regarding 

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment relating to exhaustion of the administrative remedies. 

(ECF No. 67.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice 

to the parties that objections were to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed objections on March 2, 

2015, and Defendants filed a response on March 16, 2015. Local Rule 304(b), (d).

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, including Plaintiff’s objections, 

the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 

analysis.

///

ALVARO QUEZADA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

R. LINDSEY, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:10-cv-01402-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT AS TO LINDSEY AND GONZALEZ 

AND GRANTING AS TO DEFENDANT PATEL

[ECF Nos. 50, 67]

Case 1:10-cv-01402-DAD-SAB Document 77 Filed 03/18/15 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on February 6, 2015, is adopted in full; and

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED as to Defendants Lindsey and 

Gonzalez and GRANTED as to Defendant Patel;

3. Defendant Patel is dismissed from the action, without prejudice, for failure to exhaust 

the administrative remedies; and

4. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01402-DAD-SAB Document 77 Filed 03/18/15 Page 2 of 2