Hollis v. High Desert State Prison
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 12/10/10 ORDERING that the 89 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full. Deft's 60 Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part as follows: Plft has exhausted his claim re the HDSP-07-03973 grievance; Pltf has exhausted his claim re the HDSP-C-08-1853 grievance; Defts' motion to dismiss the remaining claims is granted; Deft's Speers, Wrigley, Flaherty, Pena, Medina, Zollo, Clark, Cheney, Nason, Waterman, Swingle , Acquavia, and Dezember are dismissed from this action. Defts' 3/17/10 Motion to Dismiss deft Audette is denied. Defts Koller, Plainer, Ingrewson, Audette, Prater, Shaver, and Koenig shall file a responsive pleading within 21 days from the filing date of this order. (Owen, K)
(PC) Hollis v. High Desert State Prison
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. ROBIN DEZEMBER, 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 Rule 302. On October 19, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARVIN GLENN HOLLIS, Plaintiff, No. 2:08-cv-2810 GEB KJN 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
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 19, 2010, are adopted in full; 2. Defendants' March 17, 2010 motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 60) is granted in part and denied in part as follows: a. Defendants concede plaintiff has exhausted his claims based on grievance HDSP-07-03973; Defendants Koller, Plainer, Ingrewson and Audette are directed to file a responsive pleading to these claims; b. By grievance HDSP-C-08-1853, plaintiff has exhausted his claim that defendants Prater, Shaver and Koenig intentionally interfered with his prescribed medical treatment by denying his prescribed pillow and mattress from June 2008, through August 11, 2008. Defendants Prater, Shaver, and Koenig are required to file a responsive pleading to this claim. c. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's remaining claims as unexhausted are granted. Because these remaining claims are unexhausted, defendants Speers, Wrigley, Flaherty, Pena, Medina, Zollo, Clark, Cheney, Nason, Waterman, Swingle, Acquaviva and Dezember are dismissed from this action. 3. Defendants' March 17, 2010 motion to dismiss defendant Audette is denied. 4. Defendants Koller, Plainer, Ingrewson, Audette, Prater, Shaver, and Koenig shall file a responsive pleading within twenty-one days from the date on which this order is filed. Dated: December 10, 2010
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge
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?