Nguyen v. Biter et al
Filing
95
ORDER Adopting 94 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING Defendant's 79 Motion to Dismiss, DENYING Defendant's Motion to Strike, DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Strike, and DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions; ORDER REQUIRING Defendant to File Answer within Thirty Days signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/3/2013. (Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
ANTHONY NGUYEN,
11
Plaintiff,
v.
12
13
M. D. BITER,
Defendant.
14
Case No. 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO PC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS,
DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
STRIKE, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO STRIKE, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
15
(Docs. 79, 80, 88, 90, 91, and 94 )
16
ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO
FILE ANSWER WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
17
_____________________________________/
18
19
Plaintiff Anthony Nguyen (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
20 pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 18, 2011. This action
21 is proceeding against Defendant Biter (“Defendant”) for violation of the Eighth Amendment of the
22 United States Constitution.
23
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
24 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 16, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and
25 Recommendations which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that
26 Objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No Objections
27 were filed.
28 ///
1
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a
2 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings
3 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
4
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
5
1.
The Findings and Recommendations, filed on October 16, 2013, is adopted in full;
6
2.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, filed on March 18, 2013,
7 is DENIED;
8
3.
Defendant’s motion to strike Plaintiff’s surreply, filed on May 21, 2013, is
9 DENIED as moot;
10
4.
Plaintiff’s motion to strike Defendant’s reply, filed on May 30, 2013, is DENIED;
11
5.
Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, filed on July 5, 2013, is DENIED; and
12
6.
Defendant shall file an answer within thirty (30) days from the date of service of
13 this order.
14
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
16 Dated: December 3, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?