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)

Download PDF
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?