Harris v. Orrick

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 1/7/2010 ORDERING 17 Findings and Recommendations are adopted in full; and 12 Motion to Dismiss is denied. (Matson, R)

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. SERGEANT ORRICK, Defendant. / 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 November 5, 2009, 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 days. Defendant Orrick 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 ORDER CHARLES HARRIS, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-1052 FCD DAD P IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 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; Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 5, 2009 are adopted in 2. Defendant's August 17, 2009 motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 12) is denied. DATED: January 7, 2010. _______________________________________ FRANK C. DAMRELL, 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?