Cortinas v. Gipson et al
Filing
102
ORDER ADOPTING 66 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and ORDER DENYING 62 Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order Directing Action by California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Officials signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/24/2015. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LARRY WILLIAM CORTINAS,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
M. PORTILLO, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Case No.: 1:13-cv-01229-AWI-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR COURT ORDER DIRECTING
ACTION BY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
OFFICIALS
[ECF Nos. 62, 66]
Plaintiff Larry William Cortinas is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On March 27, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was
20
served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that objections to the Findings and
21
Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed objections on April 13, 2015.
22
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de
23
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s objections,
24
the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper
25
analysis.
26
///
27
///
28
///
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
The Findings and Recommendations, filed on March 27, 2015, is adopted in full; and
3
2.
Plaintiff’s motion for a court order directing action by California Department of
4
Corrections and Rehabilitation officials is DENIED.
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
Dated: June 24, 2015
8
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?