(PC) Ramsey v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAVON LOVOWE RAMSEY, No. 2:20-cv-01359-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Ravon Lovowe Ramsey (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed 19 this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 20 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On October 21, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 23 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 9.) On 24 November 2, 2020, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 12.) 25 The Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which 26 objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 27 Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982); see 28 also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009). As to any portion of the proposed 1 findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the Court assumes its correctness and 2 decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th 3 Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi 4 Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 5 Having carefully reviewed the entire file under the applicable legal standards, the Court 6 finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate 7 judge’s analysis. 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 21, 2020 (ECF No. 9), are adopted 10 in full; 11 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust available 12 administrative remedies; and 13 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 DATED: December 7, 2020 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28