Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01343/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01343-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

Plaintiff,

vs.

RODOLFO AGUIRRE, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:12cv01343 AWI DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS 

AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND 

DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

PENDING AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING

(Documents 94, 103)

Plaintiff Bryan E. Ransom (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action. Defendants paid the filing fee and removed the action to this Court on August 16, 

2012. 

On December 30, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for partial summary judgment based 

on Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. The matter was referred to a United 

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

On August 25, 2015, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendants’ 

motion be denied pending an evidentiary hearing. The parties were advised that objections were 

to be filed within thirty days of the date of service of this order. No objections have been filed.

Case 1:12-cv-01343-DAD-GSA Document 104 Filed 09/30/15 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 

a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the 

Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 25, 2015, (Doc. 103) are 

ADOPTED in full; 

2. Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment based on Plaintiff’s failure to 

exhaust (Document 94) is DENIED PENDING AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING;

and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 30, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01343-DAD-GSA Document 104 Filed 09/30/15 Page 2 of 2