Simmons v. Hedgpeth
ORDER re 243 Defendants' Request for Clarification Filed 11/22/2017, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/27/17. (Gonzalez, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CHRISTOPHER I. SIMMONS,
GRISSOM, et al.,
Case No.: 1:07-cv-01058-DAD-SAB (PC)
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION FILED
NOVEMBER 22, 2017
(ECF No. 243)
Plaintiff Christopher I. Simmons is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On November 22, 2017, Defendants Grissom, Keiley, Rients and St. Lucia filed a request for
clarification regarding the Findings and Recommendations issued this same date. (ECF No. 243.)
Defendants correctly point out that one portion of the Findings and Recommendations incorrectly
states that their motion for summary judgment should be denied, but the actual recommendation is to
grant Defendants’ motion. Accordingly, for purposes of clarification, the Findings and
Recommendations, in its entirety, should recommend that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment
Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant Akanno withheld pain medication from Plaintiff in
retaliation for filing a grievance in October 2007 about his medical treatment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 27, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?