Jauregui v. Cate et al

Filing 87

ORDER adopting 75 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/26/13: Defendant Hsieh's August 2, 2012 motion for summary judgment is granted. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JORGE ROBLES JAUREGUI, 11 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-2283 JAM JFM (PC) vs. 13 MATTHEW CATE, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 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 February 21, 2013, 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. Plaintiff 22 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 February 21, 2013, are adopted in 3 full; and 4 5 2. Defendant Hsieh’s August 2, 2012 motion for summary judgment is granted. DATED: June 26, 2013 6 7 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?