UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 30, 2012
RICHARD A. OCHOTORENA,
DARREL G. ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Richard A. Ochotorena ("Plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's complaint, filed November 30, 2005, against Defendants Duncan, Fambrough, Curtiss, Lane, Kalkis, and Rodriguez for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and against Defendants Adams and Reynoso for conspiracy to harm Plaintiff. On April, 3, 2009, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment and partial summary judgment. Doc. 55. 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 March 9, 2012, 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 fourteen days. Doc. 123. Plaintiff filed a statement of no objection to the Findings and Recommendations on March 28, 2012. Doc. 124.
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 March 9, 2012, is adopted in full;
2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment, filed April 3, 2009, is granted;
3. Partial summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants Rodriguez, Kalkis, Curtiss, Fambrough, Lane, and Duncan and against Plaintiff as to Plaintiff's conspiracy claim;
4. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants Adams and Reynoso and against Plaintiff in full;
5. Defendants Adams and Reynoso are dismissed from this action; and 6. The matter is referred to the Magistrate Judge for trial setting proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.