Green v. Chakotos et al

Filing 44

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART 32 , 41 , signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/11/14. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 IRA GREEN Plaintiff, 11 12 Case No. 1:11-cv-01611-LJO-DLB PC v. 13 JOHN CHAKOTOS,, 14 Defendant. _____________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART (ECF Nos. 32 & 41) 15 Plaintiff Ira Green, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil 16 17 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 22, 2011. This action is proceeding on 18 Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, filed on May 3, 2013, for claims against Defendant John 19 Chakotos for 1) deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and 2) state law 20 negligence. (ECF Nos. 25 & 28.) 21 22 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. On July 18, 2014, the Court issued a findings and recommendations recommending granting Defendant’s motion in part and 23 24 25 26 denying in part. (ECF No. 41.) Defendant filed objections on July 25, 2014 and Plaintiff filed objections on August 1, 2014. (ECF Nos. 42 & 43.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this 27 case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations 28 to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Court adopts the findings and 2 recommendations, filed on July 18, 2014, in full. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill August 11, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 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?