Jones v. Barron et al
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/27/2012 ADOPTING 24 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING in part, DENYING in part 18 Motion for Summary Judgment; REFERRING this matter back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Michel, G)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
MARCELL JONES,
11
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
vs.
JOHN DOE, Warden, et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
No. 2:10-cv-0396 JAM JFM (PC)
ORDER
/
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 January 20, 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. Both
22
parties have 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
25
entire 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 January 20, 2012 are adopted in full;
3
2. Defendants’ March 9, 2011 motion for summary judgment is denied as to
4
plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim of excessive force against defendant Barron and granted in
5
all other respects; and
6
7
3. This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
DATED: March 27, 2012
8
9
/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?