Opinion
1:13-cv-0916 AWI EJP (PC)
10-29-2015
MARK HUERTA, Plaintiff, v. M. D. BITER, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. 15.)
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED UNDER SECTION 1983 ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE
Mark Huerta ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 March 10, 2015, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that this action be dismissed based on plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under §1983. Plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff requested and was granted two thirty-day extensions of time to file objections. (Docs. 16, 17, 18, 19.) Plaintiff's deadlines have now expired, and as of the date of this order, no objections have been filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 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 proper analysis. Plaintiff has not adequately alleged deliberate indifference by any defendant, cf. Nguyen v. Biter, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119406 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 8, 2015), nor has he demonstrated an injury.
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on March 10, 2015, are adopted in full;IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 29, 2015
2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983;
3. This dismissal is subject to the "three-strikes" provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011); and
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
/s/_________
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE