Johnson v. Young et al
Filing
67
ORDER adopting and accepting 60 / 61 Report and Recommendation; granting in part and denying in part 36 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; and denying 38 / 56 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 11/18/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
9
LAUSTEVEION JOHNSON,
10
CASE NO.: 3:14-CV-00178-RCJ-VPC
Plaintiff,
ORDER
11
v.
12
N. YOUNG, et al.,
13
Defendant.
_______________________________________
14
15
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge (#60 and 611)
16
entered on October 8-9, 2015, recommending that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
17
Judgment (ECF #38/56) and grant and deny in part Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF
18
#36). On October 26, 2015 Plaintiff filed his Objections to Magistrates Report and Recommendation on
19
Dispositive Motions (ECF #63). On October 26, 2015 Defendants filed a Limited Objection to
20
Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation (ECF #64). On November 9, 2015 Plaintiff filed his Response
21
to Defendants Objection to Magistrate Report and Recommendation (ECF #65). On November 9, 2015
22
Defendants filed thier Opposition to Plaintiff’s Objection to Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation
23
on Dispositive Motions (ECF #66).
24
The Court has conducted it’s de novo review in this case, has fully considered the objections of
25
the Plaintiff, the pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant
26
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge’s
27
Report and Recommendation (#60/61) entered on October 8-9, 2015, should be ADOPTED AND
28
ACCEPTED.
1
Refers to court’s docket number.
1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #36) is
2
GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s First Amendment Retaliation Claim against Defendants Baker, Cox, and
3
Moore; First Amendment Access to the Courts Claims; and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Claims,
4
but DENIED as to Plaintiff’s First Amendment Retaliation Claim against Defendant Young.
5
6
7
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #38/56) is
DENIED in its entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of November, 2015.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
_____________________________________
ROBERT C. JONES
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?