Opinion
Case No. 2:14-cv-9651 FMO (GJS)
07-11-2016
MANUEL M. SOARES, Plaintiff v. R. GUAJARDO, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint and all pleadings, motions, and other documents filed in this action, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), Defendants' Objections to the Report, and Plaintiff's Reply. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which objections have been stated.
Defendants' objections unduly parse certain undisputed facts in an attempt to demonstrate purported errors made by Plaintiff in his administrative grievances. For the reasons set forth in the Report, the Court does not find Defendants' objections persuasive. Notwithstanding Defendants' attempts to establish occasional instances of hyper-technical noncompliance, the objections fail to show any error in the Report's conclusion that the two fully exhausted appeals (602 CMC-E-14-00817 & 602 CMC-E-14-000711) put prison officials on notice of the allegations against Defendants Hernandez, Schram, and Guajardo regarding the events of April 9 and 15, 2014 at issue in this action.
At the end of Defendants' objections, they argue that observation set forth late in the Report—stating that an exception to the exhaustion requirement may apply to Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Hernandez—is not supported by the Magistrate Judge's findings or Ninth Circuit case law. This observation was dicta and is unnecessary to the conclusion of the Report that Plaintiff has exhausted his claims. As such, it does not serve as a basis for rejecting the Report.
The Court accepts the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report subject to the typographical changes noted in the footnote below. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
Page 7, line 10 "appeal 602 CMC-E-14-01157" is corrected to "appeal 602 CMC-E-14-01353"; Page 14, line 13 "appeal 602 CMC-E-14-01497" is corrected to "appeal 602 CMC-E-14-000711"; and all references to appeal "602 CMC-E-14-00071" are corrected to "602 CMC-E-14-000711." --------
(1) Defendants' Motion is DENIED; and
(2) within 21 days of this Order, Defendants shall file and serve an answer the Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: July 11, 2016
/s/_________
FERNANDO M. OLGUIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE