Lear v. Biter et al

Filing 78

ORDER ADOPTING 76 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING 51 Motion for Summary Judgment; ORDER DENYING Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 64 ; ORDER DENYING 69 Motion for an Immediate Resolution of all claims; ORDER DENYING 74 Motion for an Albino Hearing; This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/24/18. (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RODERICK WILLIAM LEAR, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 1:15-cv-01903-DAD-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JOHNATHAN AKANNO and JENNIFER PALOMINO, (Doc. Nos. 51, 64, 69, 74, 76) Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Roderick William Lear is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred 20 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On August 30, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 22 recommending that the court deny the following: plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining 23 order, defendants’ motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, plaintiff’s motion for 24 immediate resolution of all claims, and plaintiff’s motion for a hearing pursuant to Albino v. 25 Baca, 747 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2014), and other miscellaneous relief. (Doc. No. 76.) The findings 26 and recommendations provided fourteen days for the parties to file objections. (Id.) On 27 September 10, 2018, plaintiff filed a response stating that he has no objections to the findings and 28 recommendations. (Doc. No. 77.) Defendants did not file objections, and the time for doing so 1 1 2 has expired. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 3 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 4 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, 6 1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 30, 2018 (Doc. No. 76) are 7 adopted in full; 8 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment due to plaintiff’s claimed failure to 9 exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit (Doc. No. 51) is denied; 10 3. Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 64 at 2) is denied; 11 4. Plaintiff’s motion for an immediate resolution of all claims and for other relief 12 (Doc. No. 69) is denied; 5. Plaintiff’s motion for an Albino hearing and for other relief (Doc. No. 74) is 13 14 denied; and 15 6. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 16 17 18 19 proceedings consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 24, 2018 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?