Bardo v. Subia et al

Filing 71

ORDER ADOPTING 69 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/21/2011. Defendants' 60 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and this action is TERMINATED. (Marciel, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT J. BARDO, 11 12 13 14 Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-1645 JAM KJN P Defendants. ORDER vs. SUBIA, et al., 15 16 / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 September 22, 2011, 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 twenty-one days. 22 Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 22, 2011, are adopted in 3 full; and 4 2. Defendants’ May 13, 2011 motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 60) is 5 granted. 6 DATED: November 21, 2011 7 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 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?