Lopez v. Peterson, et al

Filing 485

ORDER adopting in full 476 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 6/16/17. Plaintiff's 458 motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Defendants' 466 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's 465 motion for substitution of deceased defendant is DENIED as moot. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDREW RICK LOPEZ, 12 13 14 No. 2:98-cv-2111-MCE-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER D. PETERSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed this civil rights action 18 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On February 9, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. Defendants have filed a response to those 24 objections. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 27 file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 28 proper analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 9, 2017, (ECF No. 476) are 3 ADOPTED in full. 4 2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 458) is DENIED. 5 3. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 466) is GRANTED in part. The 6 following claims are DISMISSED: 7 (a) Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Castro and D. Peterson; 8 (b) Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Holmes, C.J. Peterson, and 9 D. Peterson; 10 11 (c) Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Babich, Baughman, and Diggs; 12 (d) First Amendment claims against defendant Baughman; and 13 (e) First and Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendant Reyes. 14 4. Defendants’ motion is DENIED in all other respects. 15 5. Plaintiff’s motion for substitution of deceased defendant (ECF No. 465) is DENIED as 16 17 18 moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 16, 2017 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?