Burnett v. Miranda

Filing 82

ORDER ADOPTING 77 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 4/15/2015. Defendants' 48 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED with respect to (a) plaintiff's claim that defendant Miranda viol ated plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights on 7/16/2010 when he denied plaintiff housing in a cell without bunk beds; (b) with respect to plaintiff's claim that defendant Simmerson violated plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights on 6/9/2010 when Simmerson failed to house plaintiff ina cell without bunk beds and (c) GRANTED in all other respects. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ESTER BURNETT,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:13-cv-1239 MCE CKD P

v.

ORDER

R. MIRANDA, 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.
On March 6, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which

20
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. Defendant Miranda has

23

filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

24
25

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

26

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

27

analysis.

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed March 6, 2015, are adopted in full;

3

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 48) is:

4

a. Denied with respect to plaintiff’s claim that defendant Miranda violated

5

plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights on July 16, 2010 when he denied plaintiff housing in a cell

6

without bunk beds.

7

b. Denied with respect to plaintiff’s claim that defendant Simmerson violated

8

plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights on June 9, 2010 when Simmerson failed to house plaintiff in

9

a cell without bunk beds.

10
11

c. Granted in all other respects.
Dated: April 15, 2015

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2