Jones v. David, et al

Filing 63

ORDER adopting in full 53 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 3/28/12; and GRANTING 50 Motion to Dismiss filed by defendant Holmes. Defendant Holmes is DISMISSED from this action. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

MALIK JONES,
Plaintiff,

11
12

vs.

13

No. CIV S-09-3174 MCE CKD P

A. DAVID, et al.,
Defendants.

14

ORDER
/

15

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

16
17

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 28, 2011, the assigned magistrate judge

18

issued findings and recommendations recommending that defendant Holmes’s November 15,

19

2011, motion to dismiss be granted due to plaintiff’s failure to file a response. On January 9,

20

2012, plaintiff filed objections stating that he inadvertently failed to respond to the motion and

21

seeking an additional 21 days to respond to the motion.
On February 8, 2012, this court granted plaintiff an additional 21 days to respond

22
23

to defendant Holmes’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion within the

24

allotted period.1

25
1

26

Plaintiff constructively filed a four-page opposition to defendant Holmes’s motion to
dismiss on March 12, 2012. (ECF No. 61.) In addition to being signed nearly two weeks after the
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 28, 2011 (ECF No. 53), are

3

ADOPTED in full; and
2. The November 15, 2011 motion to dismiss filed by defendant Holmes is

4
5
6

GRANTED.
Dated: March 28, 2012

7
8
9

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

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

deadline, this pleading lacks a meritorious argument that Holmes’s motion to dismiss pursuant to
Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should not be granted.
2