Walker v. King et al
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 137 ; ORDER GRANTING 111 Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman and Poole's Motion for Summary Judgment; and ORDER Directing Clerk to Enter Judgment in Favor of Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman and Poole signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 9/11/2020. (Jessen, A)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
Case No. 1:16-cv-01665-AWI-EPG (PC)
(ECF NOS. 111, 137)
TIM POOLE, et al.,
Roger Walker (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action filed 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.
This case proceeds “against defendants Saloum, Poole, Perryman, Davis, and Nicks on
Plaintiff’s claim for failure to protect in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.” (Doc. No. 35,
On December 17, 2019, defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole moved for
summary judgment. (ECF No. 111). On July 10, 2020, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean
entered findings and recommendations, recommending that “[d]efendants Davis, Nicks,
Perryman, and Poole’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 111) be GRANTED,” and that
“[j]udgment be entered in favor of defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole.”1 (Doc. No.
137, p. 20).
Defendant Saloum also filed a motion for summary judgment, and the July 2020 findings and
recommendation also addressed Saloum’s motion. Saloum objected to the findings and recommendation. The
Court will address Saloum’s motion and the findings and recommendation as to Saloum’s motion in a separate
order. This order is limited to the motion of Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole and the analysis of the
findings and recommendation as to their motion.
The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and
recommendations. No party has filed objections regarding the recommendation that summary
judgment be granted in favor of Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis
and thus, the motion of Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole will be granted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on July 10, 2020
(Doc. No. 137) regarding the motion for summary judgment of Defendants Davis,
Nicks, Perryman, and Poole is ADOPTED;
2. Defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and Poole’s motion for summary judgment
(Doc. No. 111) is GRANTED;
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of defendants Davis, Nicks, Perryman, and
4. This case remains open at this time as to Defendant Saloum.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 11, 2020
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?