Chavez v. Yates et al
Filing
43
ORDER Adopting 41 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, and Striking Section II of Motion to Dismiss 34 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/29/13. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
MICHAEL CHAVEZ,
Plaintiff,
11
12
13
14
15
v.
JAMES YATES, et al.,
Case No. 1:09-cv-1080-AWI-SKO PC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND STRIKING
SECTION II OF MOTION TO DISMISS
(Docs. 34 and 41)
Defendants.
_____________________________________/
16
17
Plaintiff Michael Chavez, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed
18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 19, 2009. This action is proceeding
19 on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Ehrman, Igbinosa, Kushner, Diep,
20 Hayden, Ahlin, Pineda, and Yates.
21
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
22 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 3, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and
23 Recommendations which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that
24 Objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within five days.
No
25 Objections were filed.
26
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a
27 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings
28 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
The Findings and Recommendations, filed on October 3, 2013, is adopted
2.
Section II of Defendants’ motion to dismiss is STRICKEN, pursuant to the
3 in full; and
4
5 rule of mandate.
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
8 Dated: October 29, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?