Lopez v. Schwarzenneger

Filing 138

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/29/12 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 1/10/12 124 are ADOPTED in full; The 7/25/11 MOTION TO DISMISS 76 is GRANTED and; Plaintiff's claim against defendant Roman is DISM ISSED as barred by the statute of limitations and defendant Roman is DISMISSED with prejudice from this action; claims two, three, six and seven are DISMISSED as to defendant Kissel. With respect to claims two and six, three and seven, these claims are DISMISSED with prejudice as to all defendants. This matter proceeds as to the remaining fourteen defendants on claims one, four and five only.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANDREW RICK LOPEZ,

12

No. 2:09-cv-01760 MCE GGH P

Plaintiff,

13

vs.

ORDER

14

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

/

17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

19

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On January 10, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

21

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

22

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations.

24

///

25

///

26

///
1

1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

2

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

3

Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

4

analysis.

5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 10, 2012 (ECF No. 124), are

7
8

ADOPTED in full;
2. The July 25, 2011 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 76) is GRANTED and;

9
10

a) plaintiff’s claim against defendant Roman is dismissed as barred by the statute
of limitations and defendant Roman is dismissed with prejudice from this action;

11

b) claims two, three, six and seven are dismissed as to defendant Kissel.

12

3. With respect to claims two and six, three and seven, these claims are DISMISSED

13
14
15
16

with prejudice as to all defendants.
4. This matter proceeds as to the remaining fourteen defendants on claims one, four and
five only.
Dated: February 29, 2012

17
18
19

________________________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2