Reamel v. Harrington et al

Filing 70

ORDER ADOPTING 63 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS;ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 56 Motion to Amend the Complaint, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/09/2018. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

REAMEL CURTIS,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
J. GONZALES and J. BURGARIN,

15

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-00553-LJO-JDP (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT BE
DENIED
(ECF No. 63)

16
17

Reamel Curtis (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United

19

States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On March 27, 2018, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and

21

recommendations, recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a Second Amended

22

Complaint (ECF No. 56) be denied. (ECF No. 63.) Plaintiff was given an opportunity to

23

object to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff filed his objections on April 23, 2018.

24

(ECF No. 65.)

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

26

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

27

the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper

28

analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

2

1.

3
4

The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on March 27,
2018, (ECF No. 63), are ADOPTED IN FULL; and

2.

5

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 56),
is denied.

6
7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

May 9, 2018

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2