Revis v. Syerson et al
Filing
32
ORDER ADOPTING 28 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/25/14. Defendant Syerson's 18 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. (Manzer, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ANDRE REVIS,
12
13
14
No. 2:12-cv-2751-MCE-EFB P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
DALE SYERSON, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief
18
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to
19
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On February 18, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
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. Plaintiff has filed
23
objections to the findings and recommendations and defendant Syerson has filed a response
24
thereto.
25
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
26
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire
27
file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
28
proper analysis.
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed February 18, 2014, are adopted in full; and
3
2. Defendant Syerson’s August 12, 2013 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 18) is granted.
4
So ordered.
5
Dated: March 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?