Benanti v. Matevousian, 1:17-cv-01556-LJO-SAB (PC). (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181002f24
Visitors: 4
Filed: Sep. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 28, 2018
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING DEFENDANTS' EXHAUSTION-RELATED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS [ECF Nos. 23, 31] LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . Plaintiff Michael Benanti is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING DEFENDANTS' EXHAUSTION-RELATED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS [ECF Nos. 23, 31] LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . Plaintiff Michael Benanti is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 2..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING DEFENDANTS' EXHAUSTION-RELATED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
[ECF Nos. 23, 31]
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
Plaintiff Michael Benanti is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 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 August 23, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust the administrative remedies be denied. (ECF No. 31.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that objections were to be filed within thirty days.
On September 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed objections indicating that he wished to reserve his right to appeal should the Findings and Recommendations not be adopted in full. (ECF No. 33.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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 August 23, 2018 (ECF No. 31) are adopted in full;
2. Defendants' exhaustion-related motion for summary judgment is denied; and
3. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
