Darius Gant v. Ron E. Barnes
Filing
87
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Cormac J. Carney Re Report and Recommendation (Issued) 84 : The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's Motion to Amend 35 is granted in part as follows: the proposed First Amended Petition lodged with the Motion to Amend is deemed filed as of August 25, 2016, but with the following claims stricken: Claim One(E), Claim Two, and the portion of Claim Four that incorporates and references Claim Two. (ad)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DARIUS GANT,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
v.
RON E. BARNES, Warden,
15
16
Respondent.
___________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CV 14-2618-CJC (SP)
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED
STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on
19 file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.
20 Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to
21 which petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation
22 of the Magistrate Judge.
23 \\
24 \\
25
26
27
28
1
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's Motion to Amend (docket
2 no. 35) is granted in part as follows: the proposed First Amended Petition lodged
3 with the Motion to Amend is deemed filed as of August 25, 2016, but with the
4 following claims stricken: Claim One(E), Claim Two, and the portion of Claim Four
5 that incorporates and references Claim Two.
6
7 DATED: August 28, 2017
______________________________
HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?