1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL LUCIEN GARCIA, No. 2:22-cv-1068 DC CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 KATHLEEN ALLISON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil 18 rights under

. On September 15, 2025, in 2:22-cv-1051 DC CKD P, the court 19 granted defendant Kurgan, the only defendant remaining in this action, summary judgment on 20 plaintiff’s remaining claims in that action. The court found that plaintiff failed to exhaust 21 available administrative remedies as he is required to do under

(e)(a). ECF 22 Nos. 63 & 67. The claims that remain in this action--one for excessive force arising under the 23 Eighth Amendment and one arising under the First Amendment for retaliation for protected 24 speech--arise from the same interaction between plaintiff and defendant Kurgan on August 6, 25 2021 underlying the dismissed claims in 2:22-cv-1051 DC CKD P. Because defendant has 26 already shown that plaintiff failed to exhaust available administrative remedies with respect to 27 any claim arising from that interaction, the claims remaining in this action must be dismissed. 28 ///// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that 2 1. Plaintiffs remaining claims be dismissed for failure to exhaust available 3 administrative remedies prior to filing suit; and 4 2. This case be closed. 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 7 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 8 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 9 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 10 || objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 11 || parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 12 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

(9th Cir. 1991). 13 | Dated: October 31, 2025 / ae □□ / a Ly a

15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 garcl 068fte 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28