Gipbsin v. Deforest, Goni, Prater, Shelton and Stone

Filing 87

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/13/09 ORDERING the Findings and Recommendations 57 are ADOPTED IN FULL; the conspiracy claim against dft Felker and all claims against dfts Colon, Naargard, Clark, Battey, Wong, Kernan, Terhune and Hardy are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Carlos, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. SCOTT KERNAN, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. On December 3, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations on December 11 and December 12, 2008. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CLARENCE A. GIPBSIN, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-0157 MCE EFB P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 full; and, Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 3, 2008, are adopted in 2. The conspiracy claim against defendant Felker and all claims against defendants Colon, Naargard, Clark, Battey, Wong, Kernan, Terhune and Hardy are dismissed without prejudice Dated: February 13, 2009 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?