Milliken v. Lightfield et al
Filing
28
ORDER signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 7/21/11 ORDERING that the Magistrate Judge's FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS of6/21/11 27 are ADOPTED in full; And Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint 19 is DENIED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
----oo0oo---11
12
JAMES M. MILLIKEN,
NO. CIV. 2:10-1412 WBS JFM
13
14
15
16
Plaintiff,
D. LIGHTFIELD, et al.,
Defendants.
17
/
18
19
ORDER RE: MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
v.
----oo0oo---Plaintiff James M. Milliken, a prisoner proceeding pro
20
se, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging
21
violations of his Eighth Amendment rights.
22
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
23
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Local General Order No. 262, and Local
24
Rule 302(c)(17).
25
failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
26
Procedure 12(b)(6), and Magistrate Judge Moulds recommended that
27
the court deny defendants’ motion in his Findings and
28
Recommendations issued June 21, 2011.
The matter was
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for
1
Defendants did not file
1
2
objections to the Findings and Recommendations.
This court has reviewed the record and the Findings and
3
Recommendations and will adopt the Magistrate Judge’s
4
recommendation to deny defendants’ motion to dismiss.
5
the Magistrate Judge did not cite to or discuss the Supreme
6
Court’s most recent decision addressing motions to dismiss under
7
Rule 12(b)(6), Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, --- U.S. ----
8
(2009), the court is satisfied that the Magistrate Judge applied
9
the proper standard, especially given the Magistrate Judge’s
10
discussion of Starr v. Baca, 633 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2011).
11
Starr, the Ninth Circuit addressed Iqbal’s effect on Rule
12
8(a)(2)’s pleading standard and “supervisor liability” under §
13
1983, which were both at issue in defendants’ motion to dismiss.
14
Although
In
Accordingly, because the Magistrate Judge’s Findings
15
and Recommendations are supported by the record and analysis of
16
relevant law, the court will adopt the Findings and
17
Recommendations in full.
18
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that (1) the Magistrate Judge’s
19
Findings and Recommendations of June 21, 2011, be, and the same
20
hereby are, adopted in full; and (2) defendants’ motion to
21
dismiss plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint be, and same hereby
22
is, DENIED.
23
DATED: July 21, 2011
24
25
26
27
28
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?