Reamel v. Harrington et al

Filing 58

ORDER ADOPTING 54 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DENYING 35 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/20/2018. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REAMEL CURTIS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, vs. 1:15-cv-00553-LJO-EPG-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL THAT DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DENIED KELLI HARRINGTON, et al., Defendants. (ECF No. 35, 54) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Curtis Reamel (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action 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. On January 24, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations that Defendants J. Bugarin and J. Gonzales’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 35) be denied. (ECF No. 54.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties that same day and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within twenty-one days. (Id.) Neither party timely filed an objection to the Findings and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 24, 2018, (ECF No. 54) are adopted in full; 28 1 2. Defendants J. Bugarin and J. Gonzales’ motion for summary judgment (ECF 1 2 No. 35) is DENIED; and 3 3. This action shall proceed only against defendants J. Bugarin and J. Gonzales on Plaintiff’s failure to protect claim. 4 5 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ February 20, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF 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?