Watkins v. Murphy
Filing
77
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 6/3/2019 ADOPTED in FULL 66 Findings and Recommendations. DENYING 28 Motion for Summary Judgment, and this case shall proceed to trial on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant Murphy. (Reader, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JAMES WATKINS,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:17-cv-1041 JAM AC P
v.
ORDER
D. MURPHY,
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.
On January 18, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
20
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. ECF No. 66. Plaintiff
23
has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF No. 67.
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 January 18, 2019, are adopted in full;
3
2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 28, is denied; and
4
3. This case shall proceed to trial on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim
5
against defendant Murphy.
6
7
8
9
DATED: June 3, 2019
/s/ John A. Mendez____________
_____
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?