Harding v. Rio Consumnes Correction Facility et al

Filing 39

ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 1/5/2017 ADOPTING IN FULL 35 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING 15 Motion to Dismiss with respect to the plainitff's claim against Defendant Kathryn M. Gonzales; DENYING 15 Motion to Dismiss with respect to the plaintiff's claim against Defendant Padilla; ORDERING Defendant Padilla to file an Answer to the 10 First Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint within 21 days. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRENT LEE HARDING,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-1927 JAM CKD P

v.

ORDER

RIO COSUMNES CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

19

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

20

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On October 21, 2016, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

21
22

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

23

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed

24

objections to the findings and recommendations.

25

The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

26

F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.

27

See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having

28

/////
1

1

reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record

2

and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1. The findings and recommendations filed October 21, 2016, are adopted in full;

5

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 15) is granted in part and denied in part as

6

follows:

7

A. Granted with respect to plaintiff’s remaining claim against defendant Gonzales;

8

and

9

B. Denied with respect to plaintiff’s remaining claim against defendant Padilla.

10
11

3. Defendant Padilla shall file his answer within 21 days.
DATED: January 5, 2017

12

/s/ John A. Mendez________________________

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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