UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 9, 2011
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 97)
Plaintiff Nick Woodall ("Plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 7, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment against Defendants Lawson, Sexton, and Olive. Pl.'s Mot. Summ. J., Doc. 67. On February 16, 2011, Defendants T. Gonzalez, T. Lawson, A. Olive, and M. Sexton filed a motion for summary judgment. Defs.' Mot. Summ. J., Doc. 79. On March 8, 2011, Defendant A. Raygoza filed a motion for summary judgment. Def.'s Mot. Summ. J., Doc. 81. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On August 1, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings and Recommendations was to be filed within eighteen days. Doc. 97. Neither party filed a timely Objection to the Findings and Recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 1, 2011, is adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, filed December 7, 2010, is DENIED;
3. Defendants T. Gonzalez, T. Lawson, A. Olive, and M. Sexton's motion for summary judgment, filed February 16, 2011, is GRANTED;
4. Summary judgment is granted for Defendants T. Gonzalez, T. Lawson, A. Olive, and M. Sexton and against Plaintiff;
5. Defendants T. Gonzalez, T. Lawson, A. Olive, and M. Sexton are dismissed from this action;
6. Defendant Raygoza's motion for summary judgment, filed March 8, 2011, is DENIED; and
7. This action is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.