Goolsby v. Cate et al

Filing 24

ORDER Dismissing Certain Claims, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/7/2013. Pursuant to Plaintiff's June 3, 2013, notice, the Court DISMISSES all access to courts claims in the FAC. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 THOMAS GOOLSBY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 vs. MATTHEW CATE, et al., 15 Defendants. ) 1:11cv01773 DLB PC ) ) ) ORDER DISMISSING ) CERTAIN CLAIMS ) ) ) ) ) 16 Plaintiff Thomas Goolsby (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California 17 18 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action 20 on October 25, 2011.1 21 22 On February 6, 2013, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). The Court screened the FAC on May 20, 2013, and found that it states a First Amendment retaliation claim 23 against Defendants Gentry, Noyce, Eubanks, Tyree, Medrano, Holman, Holland and Steadman, 24 25 26 27 28 and violation of due process claims against Defendants Eubanks, Tyree, Medrano, Holland and Gutierrez. The Court also dismissed certain claims and certain Defendants without leave to amend. 1 On December 5, 2011, Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge. 1 1 2 3 On June 3, 3013, Plaintiff notified the Court that he would proceed on the cognizable claims and would not amend the access to courts claim. Plaintiff has been instructed on service by separate order. 4 Therefore, pursuant to Plaintiff’s June 3, 2013, notice, the Court DISMISSES all access 5 to courts claims in the FAC. 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: 10 /s/ Dennis June 7, 2013 L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 DEAC_Signature-END: 9b0hied 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?