Moncrief v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabiliation et al
Filing
33
ORDER ADOPTING 32 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 10/8/13 GRANTING 25 , 29 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's first amended complaint is DISMISSED. Amended complaint due within 30 days. (Manzer, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
JOHN PHILIP MONCRIEF,
11
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
No. 2:12-cv-0414 MCE AC P
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On August 30, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to
the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed
objections to the findings and recommendations.
The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be
supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed August 30, 2013 (ECF No. 32) are
ADOPTED in full;
1
1
2. Defendant’s amended motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 25, 29) is granted;
2
3. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is dismissed;
3
4. Within thirty days of this order plaintiff may file an amended complaint setting forth
4
his claims for monetary damages under ADA and RA and his state law claims, except for the
5
negligent supervision claim against defendant Swarthout.
6
Dated: October 8, 2013
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?