Anderson v. Kelso, et al.

Filing 179

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 6/25/2014 ADOPTING 178 Findings and Recommendations in full. Defendants Hoffman and Pearsall are DISMISSED. Defendants' 162 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to defendants Pomazal, Cummings and Royston and DENIED as to defendants Swingle, Lee and Stovall. (Donati, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL ANDERSON, 12 13 14 No. 2:12-cv-0261-MCE-KJN-P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MATTHEW TATE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel has filed this civil rights action 18 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 12, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 12, 2014, are adopted in full; 28 2. Defendants Hoffman and Pearsall are dismissed; 1 1 2 3 3. Defendants’ summary judgment motion (ECF No. 162) is granted as to defendants Pomazal, Cummings and Royston; and 4. Defendants’ summary judgment motion (ECF No. 162) is denied as to defendants 4 Swingle, Lee and Stovall. 5 Dated: June 25, 2014 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 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?