Cato v. Darst, et al.
Filing
40
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/17/2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are ADOPTED in FULL 32 ; and Plaintiff's request to file an amended complaint 26 is DENIED. (Reader, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JAMES CATO,
12
13
14
No. 2:14-cv-0959 TLN KJN P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
M. DARST, 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 January 23, 2015, 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. Defendants filed a reply to Plaintiff’s
24
objections.
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 file, the
27
Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper
28
analysis.
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed January 23, 2015, are adopted in full; and
3
2. Plaintiff’s request to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 26) is denied.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
Dated: April 17, 2015
8
9
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
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?