Ramey v. Franco et al
Filing
27
ORDER ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 08/03/14 ORDERING that the claims against defendants Franco, Leckie, Shultz, Caplin, Peterson, Bagler, and Cohayal are DISMISSED without leave to amend and without prejudice to re-filing in a separate action. (Benson, A.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOHNNEY RAMEY,
12
13
14
No. 2:16-cv-2107 JAM CKD P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
J. FRANCO, et al.,
15
Defendant.
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 June 8, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which
21
were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings
22
and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 22.) Plaintiff has filed a
23
motion to reinstate defendants which the court construes as objections to the findings and
24
recommendations. (ECF No. 26.)
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 June 8, 2017 (ECF No. 22), are adopted in
3
full;
4
2. The claims against defendants Franco, Leckie, Shultz, Caplin, Peterson, Bagler, and
5
Cohayal are dismissed without leave to amend and without prejudice to re-filing in a separate
6
action.
7
DATED: August 3, 2017
8
John A. Mendez_______________ __________
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?