Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Charles Chatman v. Tom Felker

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


March 27, 2012

CHARLES CHATMAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
TOM FELKER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 September 12, 2011 and December 16, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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 September 12, 2011 and December 16, 2011 are adopted;

2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (Docket No. 29) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

A. Granted with respect to:

i. Plaintiff's "Count Eleven" in his complaint;

ii. Plaintiff's First Amendment claims against defendant Uribe;

iii. Plaintiff's First Amendment claims against defendants Shaver, Griffith and Peddicord resulting in their being dismissed from this action; and

iv. Plaintiff's First Amendment claims against defendants Craddock and Probst concerning events occurring June 7, 2007 resulting in defendant Craddock being dismissed from this action.

B. Denied with respect to:

i. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Uribe; and

ii. Plaintiff's First Amendment claim against defendant Harper.

20120327

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.