Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00386/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00386-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Steve Wilhelm
Plaintiff
Jeannie Woodford
Defendant

Document Text:

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 Steve Wilhelm is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On January 15, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that the 

Second Amended Complaint DISMISSED, without leave to amend for failure to state a cognizable 

claim. This Findings and Recommendation was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 

objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of the order. Instead of filing 

objections, Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit within that thirty day time frame. The Ninth 

Circuit denied the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as the order challenged was not final or 

appealable. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff filed late objections. Given this procedural history, Plaintiff’s 

objections will be considered.

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 

STEVE WILHELM,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JEANNIE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:12-cv-00386-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, DISMISSING ACTION 

WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND FOR FAILURE 

TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM, AND 

ENTERING JUDGMENT

[ECF No. 30]

Case 1:12-cv-00386-AWI-SAB Document 42 Filed 01/14/15 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

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Plaintiff is suing the Director 

of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for causing Plaintiff to endure

prolonged exposure to second hand smoke which resulted in serious health problems. However, the 

only factual allegation of personal involvement is that the Director was responsible for approving all 

rules and regulations, including permitting smoking and providing insufficient ventilation. Doc. 28. In

reviewing Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, the Magistrate Judge had warned Plaintiff that this 

bare allegation was not sufficient to state a claim. Doc. 16. Plaintiff was given an opportunity to 

amend and cure this factual deficiency. Doc. 27. Plaintiff has not done so; further amendment would 

be futile.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on January 15, 2014, are adopted in full; 

2. This action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim;

3. This dismissal is subject to the Athree-strikes@ provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. '

1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011);

4. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment against Plaintiff and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 14, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00386-AWI-SAB Document 42 Filed 01/14/15 Page 2 of 2