Simmons v. Hedgpeth

Filing 252

ORDER ADOPTING 224 Findings and Recommendations and GRANTING Defendant Akanno's 179 Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/19/18. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CHRISTOPHER I. SIMMONS,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

GRISSOM, et al.,

15

No. 1:07-cv-01058-DAD-SAB

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING
DEFENDANT AKANNO’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendants.
(Doc. No. 224)

16
17
18
19
20

Plaintiff Christopher I. Simmons is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

21

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On May 19, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued

22

findings and recommendations recommending that defendant Dr. Akanno’s motion for summary

23

judgment be granted and judgment be entered in favor of Dr. Akanno. (Doc. No. 224.) The

24

findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that objections

25

were to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed objections on September 22, 2017. (Doc. No.

26

236.) Defendant Dr. Akanno filed a response to plaintiff’s objections on October 4, 2017, to

27

which plaintiff filed an unauthorized reply, which will nonetheless be considered, on October 26,

28

2017. (Doc. Nos. 239, 241.)
1

1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the undersigned has

2

conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

3

undersigned concludes the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by

4

proper analysis. In his objections and reply plaintiff largely repeats arguments already made in

5

opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s objections provide no basis upon

6

which to reject the findings and recommendations.

7
8
9

Given the foregoing:
1. The findings and recommendations issued May 19, 2017 (Doc. No. 224) are adopted in
full;

10

2. Defendant Dr. Akanno’s motion for summary judgment is granted; and

11

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant Dr. Akanno.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 19, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2