Jordan v. Terhune, et al

Filing 268

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/12/2013 ORDERING that the clerk shall enter judgment for defendants Armoskus, Boitano, Cobb, Cox, Dreith, Eder, Felker, Fleming, Kopec, McCraw, Miranda, Platt, Roholfing, Vanderville, Wong and Wright in accordance with this court's 9/21/2009 order, shall enter judgment for defendant Brown in accordance with the Ninth Circuit's decision, and shall close this case. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

JOHN R. JORDAN, JR.,
Plaintiff,

11
12

No. 2:03-cv-1820 LKK CKD

vs.

13

CAL A TERHUNE, et al.,

14

Defendant.

ORDER
/

15
16

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant

17

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 21, 2009, the action was dismissed as to defendants Lopez

18

and Mericle and summary judgment was granted for defendants Armoskus, Boitano, Cobb, Cox,

19

Dreith, Eder, Felker, Fleming, Kopec, McCraw, Miranda, Platt, Roholfing, Vanderville, Wong

20

and Wright. (Dkt. No. 246.) Summary judgment was denied only as to defendant Brown. (Id.)

21

On September 20, 2010, this court denied defendant Brown’s renewed motion for

22

summary judgment, finding that defendant Brown was not entitled to qualified immunity. (Dkt.

23

No. 257.) Defendant Brown appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

24

Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit has reversed the denial of his motion and remanded the case for

25

further proceedings in light of that disposition. The Ninth Circuit’s mandate issued on January

26

2, 2013.
1

1

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the clerk shall

2

enter judgment for defendants Armoskus, Boitano, Cobb, Cox, Dreith, Eder, Felker, Fleming,

3

Kopec, McCraw, Miranda, Platt, Roholfing, Vanderville, Wong and Wright in accordance with

4

this court’s September 21, 2009 order, shall enter judgment for defendant Brown in accordance

5

with the Ninth Circuit’s decision, and shall close this case.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

DATED: February 12, 2013.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2