IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 28, 2008
AMANDO G. SANDERS, PLAINTIFF,
M. YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 25, 2008, this court adopted the April 30, 2008, findings and recommendations which recommended that defendants' summary judgment motion be granted in part and denied in part. The June 25, 2008, order stated that plaintiff had filed objections.
On June 27, 2008, defendants filed a request for reconsideration of the June 25, 2008, order. Defendants request reconsideration of this order because it did not reference their objections filed May 20, 2008. In these objections, defendants requested permission to file a second summary judgment motion.
Because the June 25, 2008, order did not reference defendants' objections, the June 25, 2008, order is vacated and defendants' request for reconsideration is granted.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including objections filed by plaintiff and defendants, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Defendants' request to file a second summary judgment motion, contained in their objections, is denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' June 27, 2008, request for reconsideration is granted;
2. The June 25, 2008, order is vacated;
3. The findings and recommendations filed April 30, 2008, are adopted in full;
4 Defendants' November 13, 2007, summary judgment motion (Docket #103) is denied as to plaintiff's claims that defendants Rubio and York housed him in an upper tier cell in an upper bunk following his surgery in violation of the Eighth Amendment; defendants' motion is granted in all other respects;
5. Defendants' request to file a second summary judgment motion, contained in their objections, is denied.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.