Newsom

(PC) Fenix v. Newsom

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 25, 20251:24-cv-00202California4,172 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVIN FENIX, No. 1:24-cv-00202-JLT-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDING DEFENDANTS’

13 v. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST THE

14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES BE

GRANTED

15 Defendants. (ECF No. 37) 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Currently before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment for failure to 20 exhaust the administrative remedies, filed February 14, 2025. 21 I. 22 BACKGROUND 23 This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s failure to protect claim against Defendants Miller, 24 Casaurang, and Soto. (ECF No. 24.) 25 On August 19, 2024, Defendants filed an answer to the complaint. (ECF No. 29.) The 26 discovery and scheduling order was issued on October 18, 2024. (ECF No. 36.) 27 On…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.