Munson v. State of California
Filing
51
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/24/2012 ADOPTING 44 Findings and Recommendations in full; GRANTING 38 Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff's claims that the CMF shower facilities and canteen services violated the ADA and RA; OTHERWISE DENYING 38 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Michel, G)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
KENNETH MUNSON,
11
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
vs.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
Defendant.
15
16
No. 2:09-cv-0478 JAM EFB P
ORDER
/
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding with counsel, has filed this civil rights action
17
seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
18
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
19
On August 8, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations
20
herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any
21
objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days.
22
Defendants have filed objections to the findings and recommendations and plaintiff has filed a
23
response thereto.
24
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule
25
304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the
26
entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
1
1
proper analysis.
2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
3
1. The findings and recommendations filed August 8, 2012, are adopted in full;
4
and
5
2. The October 28, 2011 motion for summary judgment filed by defendant is
6
granted as to plaintiff’s claims that the CMF shower facilities and canteen services violated the
7
ADA and RA and otherwise denied.
8
DATED:
9
October 24, 2012
/s/ John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?