Randolph v. Nix et al

Filing 97

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT 93 signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/12/2016. CASE TO REMAIN OPEN. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

COLIN M. RANDOLPH,
Plaintiff,

11

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY
PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO
FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT

v.

12
13

Case No. 1:12-cv-00392-LJO-MJS (PC)

B. NIX, et al.,
(ECF No. 93)
Defendants.

14

CASE TO REMAIN OPEN
15
16
17
18
19
20

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United
States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

On

February

2,

2016,

the

Magistrate

Judge

issued

findings

and

recommendations to deny Plaintiff’s motions for leave to file a supplemental complaint.
(ECF No. 93.) On February 10, 2016, Plaintiff filed purported objections, in which he
requested permission to withdraw his proposed complaint “without prejudice.” (ECF No.
95.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has
conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

1 Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
2 proper analysis. The purported objections do not raise an issue of fact or law under the
3 findings and recommendations. Plaintiff provides no basis for denial of the motions
4 without prejudice. Moreover, the deadline to amend pleadings has passed and the
5 matter is ready to be set for trial.
6

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

7

1.

2016 (ECF No. 93), in full; and

8
9

The Court adopts the findings and recommendations, filed February 2,

2.

Plaintiff’s motions for leave to file a supplemental complaint (ECF Nos. 73
and 74) are DENIED.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

February 12, 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2