Ceasar v. Aguirre

Filing 38

ORDER ADOPTING 27 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS that Plaintiff's 22 Motion to Strike Defendant's Affirmative Defenses be Granted in Part and Denied in Part signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/23/2017. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WALTER D. CEASAR, 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 E. AGUIRRE, 15 Defendant. Case No. 1:15-cv-00873-LJO-EPG ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART [ECF Nos. 22, 27, 32] 16 17 18 Walter D. Ceasar, III (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 19 with a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1, 9, 10, 11). This 20 matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 21 and Local Rule 302. 22 On March 23, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations that 23 Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Affirmative Defenses (ECF No. 22) be granted in part 24 and denied in part (ECF No. 27). This was served on the parties that same day and contained 25 notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen days. (Id.) 26 objections was extended to May 10, 2017. (ECF No. 31.) Plaintiff timely filed objections (ECF 27 No. 31), but Defendant did not object. 28 The deadline for In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted 1 1 a de novo review of the matter. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds that 2 the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed March 23, 2017 (ECF No. 27), are 5 adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant’s Affirmative Defenses (ECF No. 21) is 6 7 GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED as to the Second, Fourth, and Sixth 8 9 Affirmative Defenses with leave to amend within 14 days of this order; b. Plaintiff’s is GRANTED as to the First, Eighth, and Ninth Affirmative 10 11 Defenses without leave to amend. 12 c. The Motion is DENIED as to the Third, Fifth, and Seventh Affirmative 13 Defenses. 14 15 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 23, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 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?