Woods v. Carey, et al

Filing 323

ORDER adopting in full 315 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 9/26/14. Plaintiff's 307 Motion to Compel, construed as a motion to enforce the 232 2009 judgment, is GRANTED. Within 30 days from the date this order is filed electronically, Defendant Cervantes is directed to satisfy the 2009 judgment and to file a notice of compliance with the Court. Defendants' 293 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EARNEST CASSELL WOODS, II,

12
13
14

No. 2:04-cv-1225-MCE-AC-P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

19

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On August 19, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, ECF No.

21

315, herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

22

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff

23

and Defendant Cervantes have filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1

24

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the

25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff filed additional objections on September 12, 2014, ECF No. 321, which the
Court construes as a timely reply to Defendant Cervantes’s objections. On the same date,
Plaintiff filed an additional request for judicial notice which is duplicative of his two prior
requests that were granted in part and denied in part by the magistrate judge’s August 19, 2014,
order. ECF No. 315.
1

1

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

2

Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

3

analysis.

4
5
6
7
8
9

Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations filed August 19, 2014, ECF No. 315, are ADOPTED
IN FULL;
2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, ECF No. 307, construed as a motion to enforce the 2009
judgment, ECF No. 232, is GRANTED;
3. Within thirty (30) days from the date this order is filed electronically, Defendant

10

Cervantes is directed to satisfy the 2009 judgment and to file a notice of compliance with

11

the Court;

12
13
14

4. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 293, is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART as follows:
a. GRANTED as to (1) Plaintiff’s due process claim on the grounds of non-

15

exhaustion; and (2) Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Carey;

16

and

17
18

b. DENIED as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Cervantes.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20

Dated: September 26, 2014

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2