Coats v. Chaudhri, 1:13-cv-02032-AWI-BAM (PC). (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20191008n04
Visitors: 9
Filed: Sep. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 96) ANTHONY W. ISHII , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff William Thomas Coats ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. 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 September 6, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 96) ANTHONY W. ISHII , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff William Thomas Coats ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. 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 September 6, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings a..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
(ECF No. 96)
ANTHONY W. ISHII, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff William Thomas Coats ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 September 6, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations that Defendants' motion to dismiss be granted as to Plaintiff's federal claims on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims and dismiss those claims without prejudice. (ECF No. 96.) The findings and recommendations were served on the parties, and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (Id. at 9-10.) No objections have been filed, and the time to do so has expired.
In accordance with 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 issued on September 6, 2019, (ECF No. 96), are adopted in full;
2. Defendants' motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 92), is granted as to Plaintiff's federal claims on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies;
3. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims against Defendants Gladden, Nguyen, Gundran, Convalecer, and Fairchild, and those claims are dismissed without prejudice; and
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
