Asberry v. Cate et al
Filing
78
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/27/2012 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 58 are ADOPTED in FULL; and Defendant Cate and the retaliation claims against all defendants contained in the third amended complaint # 49 (docketed as the "second amended complaint") are DISMISSED. (Reader, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
TONY ASBERRY,
Plaintiff,
12
No. 2:11-cv-2462 KJM KJN P
vs.
13
14
MATTHEW CATE, et al.,
15
Defendants.
ORDER
/
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, has filed this civil rights
18
action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States
19
Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On August 8, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations,
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. (Dkt. No. 58.) Plaintiff
23
has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Dkt. No. 71.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule
24
25
304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file,
26
///
1
1
the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the
2
proper analysis.
3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1. The findings and recommendations filed August 8, 2012 are adopted in full;
5
and
6
2. Defendant Cate and the retaliation claims against all defendants contained in
7
the third amended complaint filed June 11, 2012 (docketed as the “second amended complaint”)
8
are dismissed.
9
DATED: September 27, 2012.
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?