Harris v. Fernan et al
Filing
29
ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 1/12/18 ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Defendant J. Clark Kelso is dismissed from this action. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WAYDE HOLLIS HARRIS,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:17-cv-0680 GEB KJN P
v.
ORDER
S. KERNAN, 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 December 20, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
21
which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the
22
findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed
23
objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be
24
25
supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY
26
ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed December 20, 2017, are adopted in full; and
27
28
////
1
2. Defendant J. Clark Kelso1 is dismissed from this action.
1
2
Dated: January 12, 2018
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
26
27
28
In the recommendation clause, Mr. Kelso’s last name was inadvertently omitted. (ECF No. 22
at 16.) However, in the text of the findings and recommendations, Mr. Kelso’s complete name “J.
Clark Kelso” is referenced, and his last name is used throughout the analysis. (Id. at 11-12.) The
recommendation clause simply reiterates conclusion based on the analysis set forth above. Thus,
no misunderstanding results from such typographical error.
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?