Benanti v. Matevousian
Filing
47
ORDER Adopting 45 Finding and Recommendations, and Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 42 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/4/19. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MICHAEL BENANTI,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
MATEVOUSIAN,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:17-cv-01556-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
[ECF Nos. 42, 45]
Plaintiff Michael Benanti is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
19
pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was
20
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
21
On January 23, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations
22
recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied.
The Findings and
23
Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that objections were to be filed
24
within fourteen days. No objections were filed and the time to do has passed.
25
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de
26
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and
27
Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
28
///
1
1
Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
The Findings and Recommendations filed on January 23, 2019, are adopted in full; and
3
2.
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment filed on January 22, 2019, is denied.
4
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
March 4, 2019
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
8
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?