Robinson v. Adams, et al.
Filing
202
ORDER Adopting 199 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING Plaintiff's 191 Motion for Sanctions Based on Defendants and/or Agents Acting on their behalf Obstructing Ability to Prosecute this Case signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/3/2013. (Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GEORGE H. ROBINSON,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Plaintiff,
v.
D. G. ADAMS, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
BASED ON DEFENDANTS AND/OR AGENTS
ACTING ON THEIR BEHALF OBSTRUCTING
ABILITY TO PROSECUTE THIS CASE
(ECF NO. 191, 199)
Plaintiff George H. Robinson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
20
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on the
21
complaint against Defendants David, Miranda, Melo, Garcia, Mendoza, Martinez and Masiel for use
22
of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; against Defendants Adams and Ruiz for
23
failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants Martinez, David,
24
Miranda and Garcia for assault and battery in violation of state law. The events alleged in Plaintiff’s
25
complaint occurred at California State Prison – Corcoran in 2007.
26
On November 6, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that
27
Plaintiff’s motion for an order regarding the production of his property and repair of his typewriter be
28
denied. The findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any
1
1
objections must be filed within fourteen days after service. (ECF No. 199.) More than fourteen days
2
have passed and no objections have been filed.
3
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de
4
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and
5
Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
6
7
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
8
1. The Findings and Recommendations, issued on November 6, 2013, are adopted in full; and
9
2. Plaintiff’s motion for an order regarding the production of his property and repair of his
10
typewriter is DENIED.
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
Dated: December 3, 2013
14
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?